Having a religion requires you to have faith.
Faith is believing in something WITHOUT evidence at all.
Science is the search for answers using empirical, or observational evidence.
The whole point in science is to NOT accept something unless the proper amount of evidence is given to support the hypothesis.
Science teaches to rely on evidence. Religion teaches to rely on faith, which is belief without evidence. Science promotes doubt and questioning. Religion discourage questioning.
Science give nobel prizes if you find a mistake in it. Religion tells you to go to hell if you find a mistake in it.
Yes, Science is anti-Religion.
Yes, and I have to strongly disagree with the (at the time of writing this) two answers on the 'no' side. Historically, during its entire existence science has explained almost everything, which
was formerly accredited to religious explanations only, including for example what the sun and the moon are, how different diseases work or how Earth formed.
The 'Anonymous' comment at the end of the 'no' opinions makes this even clearer. Science is the only reason why the universe is currently seen as being 'intelligently designed' by many religious people in contrast to the former picture of an active deity, which directly 'leads' the Earth around the sun by supernatural powers principally not to be understood by humans. As more and more phenomena can be explained scientifically, the need for a divine intervention is melting away.
I strongly disagree with Humble_Theist99. Religion is no study of the metaphysical, as it is no study to begin with. If it were, religious knowledge would increase, instead of being based on the same books for thousands of years.
Also, science is not subjective and cannot and shouldn't be shaped around something. Trying to force what science 'should' find and say according to some ideology has never lead to any kind of progress (google 'Soviet Union and genetics').
Finally, the only reason why science doesn't answer questions like "How should we live?" is, because that is a pointless question after all (a question science could provide an answer to would be "How to live to maximize happiness?"). Assuming something was relevant, only because it answers questions that aren't addressed elsewhere, doesn't make any sense. The statement "Eat an even number of carrots on Tuesdays only!" tells you something neither science nor religion does, but this doesn't mean science and religion should be shaped around that sentence either.
Everything in science has a lot to do with interpretation, which is all subjective. The same applies to the Bible, Qur'an or other holy book. Science can easily shape itself around religion. Science is the study of the physical world, religion is the study of the metaphysical world.
As far as how to live, science has no real answers, except maybe how to live healthier.
There was a period of time where it was common for scientists to move away from religion as they believed science could explain everything.
But now the tables have turned and many scientists are turning back to religion. Because the more we discover the more we see how perfect the universe it, how amazing the systems are that keep us alive every day and it all points to intelligent design.
Science and religion go hand in hand.
The correct question would be: "Is religion anti-science?" Science solves the mysteries of the physical world. All scientific theories and speculation is supported by evidence of some kind, in physical or mathematical form. On the other hand, religious ideas are NOT supported by any kind of believable evidence whatsoever. Even though I am an atheist, I have read some parts of the Bible. No offence meant to followers of the Bible, but frankly, I find it hard to treat it as anything more than a collection of fantastical stories. Again, no offence meant. Just stating my opinion and how I genuinely feel about it.