“well if ur basing ur beliefs on science,”
Eh. Who bases ‘beliefs’ on the process?
I do notice creationists LOVE to find science that supports THEIR beliefs… Even if it really doesn’t, but there you go.
“ill attack science.”
Betcha you don’t.
“quite simply science is completley fickle,”
No, it really isn’t.
"theories are being proven wrong all the time,”
You can name three that were COMPLETELY abandoned?
Most theories are good, for as far as they go, until we find facts the theory cannot explain, then we need a new theory that incorporates the old theory AND the new facts. That doesn’t happen all THAT often.
And it’s by scientists doing better science, so the same procwess and same methodologies, but better databases. That’s not fickle, any more than computer upgrades are fickle. My first computer had a memory of 128K bits. Not bytes. No one describes the introduction of a terabyte memory as a ‘fickle’ development.
“for example quantam physics and the theory of relativity,”
A replacement of a more detailed theory, not total abandonment of relativity.
“the big bang theory replaced a different theory (i forget what the name is).”
Cite that and get back to us.
“so really its only a matter of time until a 'more accurate theory' comes out.”
And this is a problem, why?
“what will u do then? what will happen to the beliefs u hold so staunchly”
I can’t possibly anticipate developments that haven’t developified yet. Depends on what they are.
“rather than basing ur beliefs on science, i suggest u base them on ration.”
Well, give me a ration to doubt, say, evolution.
