@Jason74

"I'm sure you've heard the staggering numbers associated that by 'chance' we evolved so quickly without boring you with the numbers the chances we evolved in such a short time frame from a primal soup is one chance against all the grains of sand in the universe."

Four billion years is an appreciable amount of time.

You can be confident a speaker doesn't know wtf they are talking about when they tell you that [insert scientific theory here] is still just a theory. What did they expect it to turn into? A chicken?

"Last time I looked it's still a theory."

A theory in science is the pinnacle of scientific understanding. Valid scientific theories explain facts, these 're broad explanations of naturally occurring phenomena. Sometimes where it is appropriate contained within these theories are smaller explanations of how small aspects of them behave, these are scientific laws.

Did you not know this? This seems to be a very common misconception amongst theists, but creationists in particular. It displays a fundamental ignorance of the most basic facts of the scientific method.

"Sheldon how many coincidences do you need."

Is that a question? If so I don't understand what you mean, need for what? A coincidence doesn't exist, it's just our subjective perception of how likely we think an event is. It's meaningless.

"First of all I stated that the religious origin of the universe was similar to current science facts, "

You cited one religion, and your claim is risible nonsense as I explained in detail, and you are now ignoring. 6 days isn't comparable to over 14 billion years, just for a start. There is nothing remotely scientific about the risible myth that makes claims about trees bearing magic fruit, and talking snakes.

"secondly I stated that evolution and religious evolution were similar both which are 2 thousand years apart"

And the claim is still laughably wrong. Nothing ahout the biblical creation myth is comparable to evolution of life, or the currentc scientific understanding of how our solar system formed. The myth couldn't even get the basic chronogy of events correct.

" science has predicted a cataclysmic event unless humanity changes its habits which religion has also predicted"

And this claim is also so stupid its risible, as the scientific explanation is objectively evidenced. The biblical myth of revelation of course is not. Again pointing at scientific evidence and claiming godidit isn't evidence, it's risible nonsense.

"the more science finds out about topics like the universe or evolution it seems to
snug up to religion quite well"

Rubbish, you're talking through your arse sorry. How does a superstitious myth claiming humans were created in an instant using unexplained magic just a few thousand years ago, reflect an evolution that took billions of years and saw humans evolve 150k years ago? That's a laughably stupid claim.

"Piggy backing on science I don't have to, the facts I've stated about science are obviously true like evolution and the Big Bang are still theories is it not Sheldon?"

No, you clearly don't know that the word theory in a scientific context is an abbreviation of scientific theory, and that when validated such theories explain objectively evidenced facts. Or that this represents the pinnacle of any scientific idea. Again only creationists make such basic errors about science.

No such evidence can be demonstrated for the vapid hokum in religious claims. They're as different as two beliefs could possibly be. Though you seem unaware of this.

"why not use science as a tool, atheists have been doing it for years."

Science is used as a tool, what on earth are you talking about? It also has nothing whatsoever to do with atheism, nor atheism with it. I am an atheist because no one can demonstrate any objective evidence for any deity. I accept science because it is the best method we have for understanding reality and is based on the best objective empirically testable evidence. It's success in understanding the universe is manifest in everything it has done.

"To me it's all about learning and not to try and debunk atheists,"

Then pit your bible down and learn some basic facts about the scientific method, and how it works. Learn what logical fallacies are, and try to remove them from your reasoning, and spot them in others.

"I love reading about science "

I'm sorry but this isn't reflected in your posts which have used some of the most risible creationist cliches. Like describing evolution as 'just' a theory, implying it's not therefore a fact, as if it can't be both. Only creationists make such basic errors about scientific terms.

@ SfT

You mean once the original verse had been bent and twisted and 'metaphorised' to match scientific fact. LOl you persist in this lameness when better minds than I have debunked your claims and the claims of others.

Fllying horses, visiting heaven...science pfft....who needs it? You have magic.

Re: "To answer your question, the Quran and science are 100% compatible."

...*face palm*.... *grooooooan*.....

If your magic book is inerrant, why is so much effort invested to silence or kill its critics?