Is religion merely failed science?

In what way can the misdeeds of the P church excuse the misdeeds of the C church, or vice versa?

Two cheeks of the same arse as far as I'm concerned and a pox on both their houses.

Watching the recent religious celebration of 100 years of partition was sickening. Church leaders getting together to stroke their already massive egos and pretend they're all really important guys whose organisations are still as relevant as ever to society. Oh and they're just the lads to fix all of the problems their churches caused... as if.

Human radio waves have not travelled "over 100 million light years", they have travelled approx. 116 light years - they have been travelling out into space for 116 years at the speed of light. This is a tiny, tiny fraction of the size of our own galaxy - roughly 100,000 light years, never mind the rest of the universe - 45-50 billion light years.

The "where is everybody" theory fails to understand the distances involved, and how vanishingly unlikely it is that one intelligent life should happen to come across another.

With respect, no you don't.

At the start of your life you had about 10 years "experience" of Santa, the tooth fairy and may be the easter bunny.

And again, with respect, no you didn't.

Yes you are correct, that was just a typo 100 light years, rather than 100 million light years, I actually do know what a light year is, still 100 light years is a vast difference many of the stars we see in the night sky are much closer than this.

In every other area though science is evidence based , yet in this one area regarding the possibility of intelligent life in the universe it does the opposite, it presumes their must be life out there just that the distances are too great. Surely for consistency science should take the position as it does in every other area that because we have zero evidence of life and have never encountered life throughput the entirety of human history that there is nothing out there and we are unique. That is the position that Fermi took, "Where is everybody"

The difference being that science is using the vastness of space and what we currently know about how life is formed, and making the logical statement that we can't be the only planet in the entire UNIVERSE that can support life (right down to the level of tardigrade is usually enough, as if they are there, then life can probably exist and, as a result, intelligent life). So it's fair to assume there is alien life out there, even intelligent life. And that's because we can't see all of space, it's literally impossible, and we're seeing less and less every second as the universe expands.

Religion however, has nothing to go on. Just belief. No facts to base anything else on, just random books written by people from a time when science was still in its infancy. There's no physical proof of god. There's no trail of evidence for him, just beliefs that the unknown was done by him. And that God mainly also depends on which part of the globe you were born in. When science says no, it's because there's literally no evidence. Life in space, 100% possible so that's why they say it (unless you really do think that the Earth is the only planet that can support life in an universe of approximately:

400 billion planets in the Milky Way. 21.6 trillion planets in the Local Group. 2 quadrillion planets in the Virgo Supercluster. 21.6 sextillion (21,600,000,000,000,000,000,000,000) planets in the observable universe. We don't even know what % of space that is. And people think Earth is the only one to support life. And God made it... Right yeah!

Faith,the trump card to beat all trump cards,what a magnificient construct,untouchable by logic,imperious to common sense,requiring no knowledge and instantly attainable once you decide its in your best interest to follow the herd or you accept what your parents decide you should believe .

So to take your first sentence. It's all guesswork. Dress it up how you like in pseudo science speak its a guess and no more.

Evolution hasn't explained to me the order and complexity of the created universe, nor can it. It can only make a guess and deny Creator.

I suggest you read John C Lennox, an Irish writer who is both a scientist and a believer in a Creator.

So, in other words, your doctrine doesn't explain it? You also say Creator, which one would that be? What name do they go by?

I've not failed to understand science at all. I just refuse to equate religion (I don't believe in religion.. It doesn't work) with science.

Faith and science operate on a totally different basis.just because I operate in the area of faith doesn't mean I don't understand science.

It's arrogance on your part to think I don't understand science.

Nope. It's your statements in this thread that demonstrate you don't understand science. Statements like:

I can have a theory that [it must be rabbits!] JFK was caught in a crossfire, or that there's a conspiracy to stop anyone winning the lotto. That's "theory" in the common or lay sense. Theory in the scientific sense means something else entirely, and you don't appear to understand that.

Here's a pretty good explanation, written for the layman (no pun intended). Tl;dr version: A "theory", as used in science, has a far higher bar than a "theory" in non-scientific common use.

are you a young earth or an old earth creationist?