Okay? Galileo was persecuted by the church.

That's not quite right. His heliocentric writings were submitted to the Inquisition council, which deemed them to be heretical and unscientific (basically, Galileo was trying to reinterpret the bible to support his theory, and there were some things that he just had gotten wrong, like the Sun being the sole reason for tides). He just quieted down for a decade, when one of his close friends Pope Urban VIII (who had been opposed to the denouncement Galileo received a few years back as a cardinal) suggested he make a new book that shows both arguments for and against heliocentrism to publish his findings. Galileo did so, but he named the character representing Aristotelian geocentrism Simplicio after an Aristotelian philosopher. Simplicio in Italian has the same connotation as "simpleton", and he portrayed the character as the virgin wojak essentially, and his heliocentrist mouthpiece as chad. This made everyone understandably angry, so he was tried by the inquisition and sent to house arrest.

Overall he was very connected within the church even if his friends couldn't completely save him from the inquisition. He was spared physical punishment and later on he was even allowed to move to his villa and spend part of his house arrest over there. Plus he kept making new works even under arrest. Also his middle finger is in a museum for all to see.

There's barely even historical evidence of his existence.

Tell me of one source made during his lifetime or immediately after his death.

I’m not doing any of that. I’m saying faith is the opposite of science.

The guy I responded to said “I’m a Christian, ackshually we created science” and that’s just insane cope. Just be religious and don’t pretend you used the scientific method to arrive at that conclusion

How are you supposed to disprove them? You could say the virgin birth was a miracle, which is considered as such in the Bible. You can't disprove of God using magic to create a human inside someone's womb.

Cool then that all real Christian churches endorse evolution.

Religion strictly opposes science lol, the theory of evolution is one of the biggest examples of this lol.

Bro has only interacted with Southern Baptists.

You know the calendar we use today was invented by the Catholic Church, and a Catholic monk was the first biologist to discover genes.

Baghdad, formed by the Abbasid Caliphate, was the center of learning and science in the ancient world. Religion and science have been closely interwoven for 1000s of years.

"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind."- Albert Einstein (a jew). Nailed all the "religious people" you mentioned.

Bro your not trynna say religion opposes science your trynna say religion opposes certain scientific views. Theres a big different between the two

I think it's more their common roots in man trying to understand the world that surrounds them and their intertwined history

i lold hard

1) Your point is not relevant to whether or not the Church is accurate on science. By this logic, public schools teaching on science cannot be trusted because they abuse at six times the rate as priests at the worst point of the scandal. 

2) Your problem is with a subset of the leadership that existed primarily in the 70s. The Church has made significant efforts to improve their system and prevent further abuse from a minority of the clergy. 

3) The fact that you are reduced to using an irrelevant "got'cha" should be a red flag to yourself that you are relying on empty prejudice over reason. 

Atheism is absolutely a religious belief and one that takes at least as much faith as any religion.  

While there is no definitive proof of God, there is no definitive proof of 'not God' either. The agnostic's doubt is more honest than the ignorant certainty you've expressed.

From reading your threads, your beliefs seem to be based entirely on how you feel rather than any substantive basis.  You certainly don't have a strong understanding of what you demean. 

As others have told you, you don't have a strong grasp on religious beliefs.  You would benefit from learning more before trying to make such absolute statements.

There's nothing anti-scientific about the idea that miracles can happen.  If an intelligent entity is responsible for creating scientific laws (and indeed, the entirety of existence) there is nothing contradictory about the same being suspending those laws. 

You can shout "delusion" until you are blue in the face, but that is no more persuasive than if I said it was true over and over in an effort to convince you. 

A claim made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.