Religion and Science are 1000% Opposite

[Crossless2.0]

It's not bizarre. It's not complicated.

'Theory' in science doesn't mean the same thing as it usually means in informal conversation. Your linked article fudges that distinction when it says that all ideas in science are "theories". That's not strictly correct. The author seems to be using the everyday, informal sense of the word to underscore the tentative nature of scientific ideas.

Proof is not something that science supplies except only in the sloppy, everyday use of the word in informal settings. Properly speaking, 'proof' is provided in mathematics and logic -- not science.

'Nothing is certain' is a sloppy way of saying that all ideas/theories in science are tentative, pending further evidence that might falsify them or cause a re-evaluation of the way we think about them. Tentativity: that splinter of honesty that all dogmatists like you seem to lack.

The rule of the game within this physical universe is that everything move and change so what make sense today will be cast in the rubbish bin of history tomorrow that is why atheism that rely on physical science is  based on pure fantasy.  

So you're yet another theist who doesn't understand the difference between metaphysical naturalism and methodological naturalism. No surprise there.

And you're beyond imbecilic if your takeaway from the tentative nature of science is that it is therefore 'pure fantasy'.

But we already knew that about you.