NOTE: I have a Bachelor of Science degree. Im not anti-science.

I love
science. I just recognize that it has limitations and flaws, as all human things
do.
A pro-science atheistic person asked me what I would do if my religion was
hypothetically proven to be wrong. His agenda was to prove that religious
people can't see things objectively. He meant to say that even if a religion is
proven wrong, its followers would never admit to it because they blindly see
life through the lens of their religion. He implied that only atheists or
agnostics could be objective. I disagreed based on my own personal
experience. I accepted Islam on the basis of reason, not blind following or
tribalism.
In the interest of being objective, I personally wouldn't publicly endorse
anything that I knew to be 100% false especially when it comes to making
claims about God. Islam is not a religion that demands blind faith. The Qur'an
provides arguments to support its claims. It asks the believers to challenge
disbelief. It claims to be a book for those who think.
Firstly, the question is problematic in the sense that not many things are
truly "known" 100%, through direct personal experience and confirmation.
Most of what we know is based on the conclusions of other people, such as
the community of experts. The rest comes from word of mouth. There's also
the problem of defining what constitutes conclusive "proof." Proof can be
subjective because we all have different standards of proof.
Proving something wrong depends on the standard of proof. My standard of
proof for a religion is not primarily scientific. My standard of proof for a
religion is primarily based on that religion having a sensible belief
system. This is how crucially important the six pillars of faith are in islam!
The true book must speak sense about:
1. God2. The prophets3. The angels4. The books5. Resurrection6.
Predestination
It was the contamination of these pillars (#1, #2, and #3) which led me to
reject Christianity as a child and allowed me to see the errors of Judaism (#2,
#3, and #4) as an adult. As a child growing up not believing in the Christian
beliefs about divinity, when I heard what Islam had to say about #1, I
immediately accepted it.
That being said, science cant possibly dictate a persons standard of proof in
religion because virtually all religious miracles violate modern scientific
theory, which has always been an incomplete attempt to describe the reality
of the universe. Science hasn't ever claimed to "know" the reality of the
universe conclusively. The day it does, discovery ends. Scientific theories are

never proven true, they are only proven false. What science believes today is
only valid until it is disproven tomorrow. Its a very shaky foundation to place
ones faith in. Although science may be useful for practical purposes of living
and getting by in the world, it can never be said to actually be reality. It is
only mans imperfect attempt to describe the seemingly infinite universe
around us. A scientific theory may give us very accurate results under
certain conditions, yet still be proven inaccurate under other conditions
tomorrow. Notice that Im focusing on the theory or the explanation of the
data. I havent yet mentioned the inherent error that comes with all scientific
data.
In order to be thoroughly convinced of a scientific opinion, I would have to be
able to run the experiment myself and completely understand the theory
myself. I would have to be skilled and competent in the field. Due to my
knowledge of my own imperfections, I am even slightly doubtful of myself
within fields that I specialize in! Im not always right. No human is. Therefore,
where do I turn when I dont know the answers? How can I completely trust
any humans conclusions when I cant even trust my own?
If I didnt test these theories myself, I would have to have faith in the
scientists who ran the experiment instead of personal, certain knowledge.
And isnt faith is unscientific, according to the atheist? Which means that one
can only be totally convinced in fields one has expertise in according to the
atheist.
After all, scientists don't have a flawless track record of being right. Their
previous understanding of reality is proven wrong with every new discovery.
On the contrary, Islam is a faith and the Qur'an has a flawless and
unchanging track record. It's never been seriously threatened by any
reasonable challenge. In fact, it presents multiple challenges to the universe,
which still stand 1400 years later. The Quran has convinced me that it is
definitely beyond human capabilities, being the speech of God Himself. Once
a person has taken that position, what human, scientist or otherwise, can
compete with it in its claim to accuracy?
If science wants to challenge religion, it should to acknowledge the accurate
scientific descriptions the Qur'an gave that predated the human discovery
and acceptance of these facts. The development fetus, the orbit of planets,
the round shape of the earth, the light of the moon being reflected, the
structure of mountains, etc.
If science wants to dismiss these description as too ambiguous or lucky
guesses today, then it can't come back tomorrow to prove a statement in the
Qur'an as unscientific. You cant have it both ways. Either the statements are
too ambiguous to be scientifically accepted, or they're clear enough to be
used as scientific evidence in favor of the Qur'an.

Therefore, science can't be the main standard of analysis for Islam as the
truth. If it were, the scientific should have become Muslim by now.
As for a religious text, if it's speaking truth about something greater than the
world (God), then it must be truthful about the world too.
Science would say that miracles can't happen. I say science is wrong. They
have happened and will continue to happen, and the Quran is the greatest
of them.
The human soul isn't satisfied with the physical world alone. Nobody ever
committed suicide because they didn't understand a scientific theory. It's
spiritual emptiness that plagues us. And we find our purpose and answers in
Gods word.
Words can be literal or figurative and can be interpreted correctly or
incorrectly. Theyre not math equations to be solved or a scientific theories to
be proven.
When you consider the fact that the Qur'an:
Reveals what man couldn't knowDoes what man couldn't doClaims what man
couldn't claim
Then what i know is enough to help me accept what I don't know.
When you combine the amazing elements of the Qur'an like:
WisdomPropheciesAccuracyHistoryRevelationCreationAfterlifeGuidanceLogic
MemorizationLaws, Discipline, and RestraintsEconomicsSocial justiceDivine
justiceSpiritualityLessonsExamplesSummary of prophethood
It's truly a collection of irresistible arguments that justify belief in the book
and submission to your creator.
As for the atheist, I respond with a few questions of my own.

If a creator is necessary for the existence of the universe (which is the only
logical conclusion), then would the creator not make Himself known to the
Creation? Would He not correct the false concepts about Himself and the
universe? That would be futility. That's not wisdom. Creation without a
reason is vanity. That reason must be communicated. We expect that from an
all-knowing all-wise creator. Alhamdulillah for the Qur'an which gives us
answers to the questions.

Other interesting points:

Peer reviewed journals and the rampant lack of reproducibility of lab test
results
The inherent error of scientific instruments
The fact that most currently popular scientific opinions are less than a
century old
The social, political, and financial interests that influence scientific studies
(funding)
The technological limitations of science
How the human being is spiritually programmed by God to recognize
certain internal truths (Faith, common sense, morality, etc.)
To be continued