There's nothing special about opposing points of view. There are debates between science and science, and debates between religion and religion as well. For as long we don't know all the absolute truths, and possibly even after that, people will disagree.
First of all, the Scopes trial did not play *any* role in any debate between religion and science as far as I'm aware. Science and religion are fundamentally opposed, and as long as both exist, there will be debate between them. Rather, the Scopes trial played an important role in *legislation* related to the teaching of science in school, rather than teaching fundamentalist religious doctrine as if it were fact. The role the Scopes trial played in this was that it made both the public and judicial authorities aware of the issues involved, up to and including the conflicts between the USA constitution and various state constitutions, as well as the conflicts between both US and state constitutions, and practice.
The conflict between science and religion in 19th century was about the creation accounts.
In the Scopes Trial!
In the 1920s, a major conflict emerged between science and religion in the United States over the teaching of evolution in schools. This debate culminated in the famous Scopes Monkey Trial in 1925, where a high school teacher was tried for illegally teaching evolution in Tennessee. The trial highlighted the tensions between religious beliefs and scientific theories on the origins of life.
There are many books that delve into the relationship between science and religion; however, many of these books have a bias towards science or a bias towards religion. Some books that delve into the relationship between science and religion are "Science and Christianity: Conflict or Coherence?" by Henry F. Schaefer III and "Rock of Ages: Science and Religion in the Fullness of Life" by Stephen Jay Gould.
there isn't a connection between sience and religion but with hindis there is a prediction with the moons and stars
The distinction between science and religion lies in their methods of seeking knowledge and understanding. Science relies on empirical evidence, experimentation, and observation to explain the natural world, while religion is based on faith, belief in the supernatural, and spiritual teachings.
the inability of science and religion to blend
Frank M. Turner has written: 'Between science and religion' -- subject(s): Religion and science, England, History
Beliefnet.com has discussion/debate boards for just about every conceivable religion on earth.
The debate between religion and relationship in interpreting scriptures is significant because it involves differing perspectives on how to understand and apply religious texts. Religion often focuses on following established doctrines and traditions, while relationship emphasizes a personal connection with the divine. This debate can impact how individuals approach their faith, the authority they give to religious institutions, and the way they interpret and practice their beliefs.
Religion is not a science.