Why 'Science' tries to separate the beginning from Evolution!

[Pat Mustard]

Religions don't like science because ...

False. Even if you modify that to say, "Religious people don't like science," it would still be false.

Oh, I'm perfectly happy to stand by my statement. Throughout history the greatest impediment to science and persecutors of scientists have been those in a position of religious authority. From the Greek priests stamping down on the beginnings of a nascent scientific revolution, to the persecution and murder of scientists by christian sects since its conception in 325CE. to the modern movement of creationism which is trying to replace science with lies in the classroom for religious motives, you'll not find a single other mindset as hostile to scientific inquiry as the religious power one.

---

Sun shines down and plants grow.  There's our baseline.  Above aside and in concert with that..is whatever gods explicitly do.

So, if I understand you correctly, what you're asking me is whether I acknowledge that the natural world operates independent of God. In response I would say that this proposition (1) is not a scientific one, and (2) is in dire need of evidence or valid justification. Does the natural world indeed operate independent of God? I can't acknowledge that it does if I haven't been given any good reason to do so.

Here's one very good reason, it currently operates as it does, with no evidence of either actions by a god or even evidence that a god exists. On William of Ockham's razor alone that is sufficient to state that nature exists with no divine input, without some compelling evidence to the contrary turning up.

It is your obligation to provide said evidence for god if you wish others to accept the existence of* your god.

*I was going to say "believe in" here, but then remembered that belief is what you have when you make a positive claim without evidence, like for example a belief in a god.