A complaint I hear from religionists about science:
It's all just a bunch of theories. Science is constantly proving previous science as incorrect.
OK, here's one way to illustrate a major difference between Science and Religion.
SCIENCE: Never perfect, and always changing. We start with blocks of stone, and over much consideration and time, we sculpt them into shapes that are closer and closer to Reality. From the start, we know it's an approximation, but we also know we'll eventually use tests and evidence to sculpt rocket science, or cures for disease and cancer, or instant electronic communications among people in society, and so on. Reality becomes understood in finer and finer and deeper and deeper detail, even though no single person can understand all of it at once. A comprehensive understanding of science requires some trust in so-called "experts", who are sometimes incorrect. But our sculptures keep improving, and are increasingly useful.
RELIGION: Always claiming to know truth from the beginning; all one has to do is "believe" it to receive personal enlightenment and reward. Problem is, there are different religions, i.e. different versions of scripture and Reality, which have little need to agree with one Reality. The dogmas are forever encased in glass, for all to see, and immune from evidence of Reality outside of its showcase. Anyone can accept whatever version of "Reality" they want to, and it's comforting to just believe in whatever the local culture showcases and has believed in for hundreds or thousands of years.
Nice myth... or propaganda.
You do realize it's a myth, right?