Two things. First, religion doesn't have to be incompatible with science to be full of shit. Look at Buddhism and the Dalai Lama. He's quoted as saying that if science disagrees with Buddhism, then Buddhism must change. This is the classic move of reversing the burden of proof, demanding the skeptic prove him wrong, rather than him proving Buddhism right. Buddhism can be made almost reality free and still be stupid, immune to logic, garbage.
The second is that we have evolved as a species to have robust mechanisms for passing knowledge from one generation to the next. The family and the tribe band together for support, but also because it allows the efficient transmission of knowledge. And it doesn't matter if what is transmitted is true or not, if the adults believe it, they will efficiently pass it on to the young. It's how we're built. The most reliable predictor of what a young person comes to believe is what the adults in their family unit believe. It being true or false is irrelevant because the mechanisms of transmission are many times more reliable than the mechanisms for correcting false beliefs. Fortunately, in the modern world that is changing, but looking to family and elders will likely always remain the first source of truth and belief. And that means, no matter what, religion will carry on as a result of the inertia of that process, regardless of whether or not better beliefs and truths are available. (And it goes beyond just teaching; we have built in biases which lead us to trust those sources and distrust others. The process is, truly, robust. It had to be to yield us. But that's a major obstacle in getting rid of religion.)
![[Image: extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg]](https://i.postimg.cc/zf86M5L7/extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg)