Religion on the other hand can have true statements because they are deduced from a priory axioms that a matter of beliefs. For example, given some axioms about God, one can deduce that the world is such because God is made it so. This will be similar to Banach–Tarski theorem [1] which is true as long as one believes in the Axiom of Choice. But such statements are not a scientific theories precisely because it is not possible to design an experiment that will disproof them.
[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banach%E2%80%93Tarski_paradox
That should be doable right?
Or what would be a better description on what science make unique and better than religion?
No, religion cannot explain anyrhing reliably as it's based on dogmas and not facts.
In the meantime, I recommend the book The Evolution of Religion by Robert Wright, a very sane author that's written a lot of great books, in my opinion.
No, building a reality based on a dogma is the most close-minded thing you can ever do.
It can only explain things inside it's belief system.
If you haven't encountered this kind of fanatic, consider yourself lucky. These days I'd feel safer drawing a picture of Mohammed than blaspheming The Science by asking heretical questions or making unholy observations. You never know when the secular-inquisition will come for you, but you always expect it.
Independent people have and can discover the same truth while in religion everyone who invented one, believe in something different.
Science is universal. Religion is stupid.