Why does a comparison between science and religion seem to lack any substance? Well, today we are plagued by a priority of the method by which we know a fact. So while the method of religion (revelation) seems quite shallow, apparently there is nothing to compare. But method is not the only parameter and, after all, it might be the least essential to life.
Try instead to consider the content itself, you will find much to compare—and the discussion is much more interesting once method is removed. Try contrasting the world disclosed by science and one disclosed by religion. If you do, you will find that behind them lie very different ways of life.
For an everyday example simply think on Christopher Nolan’s Interstellar—that story can only resonate with one who is attuned to a scientific worldview—a “mankind triumphing over an objective nature.” This message manifests by way of dramatics: through a redemption of mankind itself. First we are presented with a picture in which mankind has destroyed his home. Mankind then fails once more in a savior figure, Dr. Man—an individual succumb to his own humanity. Yet, the story resolves by way of a de-individualized mankind which redeems itself in a physical future man.
I, for my part, found much disgust in the audacity of this morality.