If this is what you truly believe, itÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s no wonder you take such a dim view of science.
When clams are found on top of a mountain, and the only considered explaination by science is what? The mountain rose from the bottom of the sea. No flood (alternative explaination that denies God). Science is to give all considerations, but it does not where God is concerned. I watch science videos, and science t.v. programs all the time. Everytime I see evidence found that can have biblical value, science does not see it. Nor do they give it any consideration. Every program is designed to disprove any evidence that may even remotely support God. And I have yet to see one science program that would totally make, or theorize, an event that supports God, without sounding like it has been disproven, even if it is only a guess as to what probably happened by naturalistic means.
But yet, they will use God's word to research and find places to dig up to find evidence if past civilations. But on the other hand, they will claim more than half the book is mere myth, fantasies, poetry, in error, written by mere men that were not inspired by God, etc... Which all carry the same meaning, that it's a lie. And are constantly working to make the rest sound like a lie as well.
I wonder what one of the requirments are for reaching the upper levels of science is? For I see not one ever mention his faith in God. And how many are thrown out of the upper circles when they do? You may say that there are several scientists that believe in God. But are their futures, in science, to ever reach top positions while they retain their faith? Could they even discuss God in a positive manner at a scientific convention without damaging their scientific standing amoung fellow scientists? A room full of atheist welcomes no God. And will make sure that your view never affects the theories and the foundations of science they hold so dear. So to mention, God only seals your fate, in the scientific world that will always claim: there is no God.
What someone believes should not affect their standing in their field, if the field was not bias. And unless it is also a threat to what already exists in that field. Evidence found should have all considered possibilies, regardless of the direction it leads. Sought out to it's end, instead of blown out of the water without further investigation.
Example: If it were said that all the missing links were on the same mountain as the ark, science would spare no expense to get to it. Even as far as to risk their lives trying to uncover it. But the ark is up there. And how much has science even tried to bring it down and examine it? Why is it still up there? Is not this considered one of the greatest scientific finds? But, it does not support any known scientific theory does it? So it stays up their as a mystery. Because science knows to bring it down, they would have to scramble to do damage control, while trying to explain how something like this could exist when they have done so much to disprove God.
If science is not an athiest club only, name one scientist, that holds a very high position in science, and is a christian, and is not restricted from talking about his faith in scientific circles? Why would science restrict free speech and free expression in this manner, if God were not a threat to science, then having faith in Him should not be a problem. And from what I understand, most scientist's considered it a defection if one of them decides to believe in God.
Can belief in God and science work? Try to reach upper levels of science and see how far you get while trying to maintain your faith.