Speaking for the religious side of things

We were told to find out as much as we could about either Franz Fanon or Dinesh D'Souza. So I though, what better way to learn about these guys than to watch them in action, so I watched this video of D'Souza debating with Christopher Hitchens about what is the truth, god or science.  D'Souza, being one who strongly believes that God is the answer to the world, decides to try and prove Scientific Laws completely wrong, and therefore since science isn't the answer, then god must be.  I agree with what monica has to say.  The reason he has such strong beliefs is because he grew up in india and there everyone is religious.  However growing up in a purely religious environment puts him at a huge disadvantage.  In order to argue one side or the other, you must have equal knowledge of each side, and this is where he is lacking.  Also, in this video he contradicts himself by first "proving" that all scientific laws are completely false.  Later to only prove his point that god must exist through the use of science and its laws.  I do believe that he has a point, however, I don't truly understand it or agree with it.

However, I think that speaking for the religious side of things is one of the hardest things to support.  There is no evidence at all, no way you can test to see if there is a god or not.  In order to "prove" there is a good you simply have to disprove every other idea out there that exists, and D'Souza attempts to do this.  His side is much harder to argue, and this is why I respect him.  Maybe I only feel this way because I am much more of a science guy that a religious one.