What is science based on?

Science is based on systematic dealing of a subject. observation, experiments, results, analysis, postulation and theorisation are all involved in making a scientific reality. Science has proven itself to be most promsing in explaning the outer world in systematic, logical and comprehensible way. I was a theist in childhood and early teenage and became agnostic in my teenage and remained so in most of that part of my life. i was a science enthusiast and believed in scientific power and not in extra human thing. later my reconversion to theism started when i tried to search answers to some of my basic questions and theory of evolution was the first step in my reconversion. it doesn't preclude the origin of life itself but the evolution of life. when i tried to search for the answer to origin, the only thing i found was that it was either a chance or abiogenesis. abiogenesis is completely opposite to biogenesis about which there is near consensus that it's a fact. something we don't believe in normal science. at this point in time i started feeling the limitations of sciences and later i was convinced that science doen't and can not have answers some very basic questions like from where and how we came here? what is our purpose of life? where do we go after? and many questions like that. I figured out that to every existing thing there is a creator so there must be a creator to human beings, this is not as simple as i have put it. you can read my detailed account here. http://www.mylot.com/w/discussions/953661.aspx Why people chose science at the cost of religion!? i think there are 4 basic reasons why and how it happened. 1. the same as described above that science provides the answers in most systematic and comprehendible way which are easily testifiable and easy to understand by an average person, on the other hand real belief in GOD really takes a thinking mind, though it's very easy to find HIM (it's only now i can say that after i have already found HIM):-), i really spent 100s if not thousands of my nights thinking about GOD. 2. Problem from within: Stubborn and unyielding Behavior of clergy in each religion against scientific facts which caused people to believe that when one part of religion (as told by clergy, not actually) can be proven wrong by scientific exploration than other parts could also be wrong. Similarly behavior of clergy with scientists at that time when revealed to general public it added fuel to fire and people got fed up. 3. Enlightenment, Economy and development: Following the scientific revolution, there came industrial revolution changing the status of average countrymen thence changing their faith about who provides for better means of life. a form of battle between science and religion, which was never called for, slowly created a sense that religion is backward and unable to provide with good chances and future and rational aproach. 4. The people who don't like religion (may be because of responsibilities, duties or rituals, bindings etc etc) they need something to stick to, whether rational or irrational. They need something they can cling to against religion, so they get hold of science. These very people are the ones who have made and propagated, intentionally or unintentionally, science as a religion. This is but a brief take on about sciences. I do love sciences and i am into it professionally, i only don't like it when it crosses it's own defined premises.

My writings the Evolution of Religion covers the divide like a bridge between Science and Religion. What can scietifically be proven? What have you read in the Bible that leads you to question the event described? Can you think of one or two?

here is the short answer, science is more accurate because you dont have to go on the word of some text. in science someone does something documents every step and everything he used and a bunch of other things. and then you can pick up what he wrote down do it yourself and get the same damn reasult. and not only you but anyone else can. you an do something get a result and someone else in timbuckto who hasnt managed to read your document on what you did could do it and get the same result independently. this is why it is more accurate. it can be checked and if your wrong people can tell you and you'd have to admit it because there is solid undeniable independently gathered PROOF. something no holy book has