You see, what you and others of your ilk fail to understand is that science is not, and has never been, a relevant vehicle for determining the truth. It is a philosophical category error to believe so.
Then there is simply no common ground upon which to base a discussion. Your statement is at bottom irrational and it is impossible to have a rational discussion beginning with an irrational premise. The basic premises are these:
1. There are regularities in nature.
2. These regularities can be observed and classified (or modeled, if your prefer), and one can arrive at a very high probability one's model is correct given enough data, even if due to the problem of induction one cannot arrive at absolute certainty. These models, then, allow you to make accurate (enough) predictions.
3. These regularities are due to ontological things like substance and accident even if one cannot arrive at a one-to-one backwards correspondence.
Not only are these irrational to deny, all Christian apologetics is toast if you do. There's no "evidence" Jesus performed miracles or even existed. What you have in front you that claims to be the "Bible" may be completely unrelated to what was actually written down thousands of years ago. Even if He did rise from the dead or walk on water, that might not be a miracle; it's just one of those things that happens from time to time.
I await your retraction and apology regarding the myth of ring species and hubristric claims to truth on this matter.
Wait, what? I thought you just said science was not a relevant vehicle for determining the truth. How then can you claim to know the truth that ring species are a myth?