An important aspect of science is being open to and even seeking out that which might disprove your theory.

An important aspect of God and Christianity is being open to and even seeking out that which might disprove your theory. I would like to hear from you regarding what evidence you feel shows that Christianity or God didn’t happen or couldn’t happen. You said creationists scientists fail trying to find support for their beliefs not testing it against reality??? You’re not realizing this bold statement doesn’t make any sense. If you know what you’re talking about here then you know that it’s faith based rendering your statement baseless and obviously incorrect. Christianity doesn’t deny evolution it simply believes God created it. As you know time and time again unbelieving scientists find themselves or their theories wrong. I wonder why? Obviously non believers such as yourself refuse to believe because it condemns you and you falsely believe it condemns evolution. It doesn’t, but it may not absolutely agree with what scientists insist is absolutely the gospel concerning reality. Then they discover the flaws in their theory and are struck with the question how could they have been wrong. But yet they are very much trying to find support for their beliefs and always manage to find an excuse for why they were wrong and an explanation that they hope and expect the world to accept proving that once again they are right. Did you hear what I just said?? If you have any questions or criticisms of Christianity, I would be happy to address them to the best of my ability.

Yes, scientific theories and models get overthrown on a fairly regular basis. This was well documented in a book by Thomas Kuhn called 'The Structure of Scientific Revolutions' that introduced the notion of paradigm shift.

However, many scientific revolutions turn out to be further enhancements and improvements to the theories they overturn. For example, when Einstein's relativity supplanted Newton's theories of space time and gravity, the changes in predictions turned out to be minuscule for most of the experiments that could be done at the time.

So, with that in mind, I'll link you to an effect which isn't included in Darwin's evolution. It alters evolution and improves it. It's called epigenetic modification. It's a little complicated so I'll just give you a paragraph with link.

https://www.cd-genomics.com/blog/epigenetic-modification-types-applications-diseases-development/

That basic principle is so of science generally, not just evolution and its related studies.

It upsets some people because they are afraid of the sort of uncertainty, questioning and revision upon which science relies, thrives and progresses.

I view the evolution question as unimportant. God, if there IS a God, could well have used evolution to achieve his/it's, aims... After all, he/it uses Newton's laws of motion to orbit the Earth around the sun, etc etc... ?

The (true) idea that every step along the way, and not only the end product, needs to provide an advantage can be difficult to imagine. How did a fish fin become the leg of a stem reptile? The fin works well for the fish. The leg and paw work well for the reptile. But all those intermediary stumps had to work better than the one before it.

Contrary to what many laypeople seem to think, scientists try to prove theories wrong. That's how knowledge increases.