You confuse the creation or invention of something with its use.
Of course many people can use a tool which they would have been incapable of inventing, prevented as they were, as in this case of the ancient Chinese and other non-Christians, by notions that were of obstacle to that development.
The concept of laws of nature is the tool in this case, which the Chinese couldn’t grasp, let alone create. Once the concept exists and is widely used, even they can employ it.
Your irrelevant example of fire-making skills reveals that your knowledge and understanding of what is science is very limited.
You’re obviously incapable of proper reading comprehension, so let me break it down for you:
I’m not talking about ancient Chinese there, but present-day Chinese (atheist) scientists who do contribute valuably to the body of scientific works.
The fire example was to point out to you that without the cavemen inventing fire, humans wouldn’t have advanced to the stage where they could have enough societal stability to perform scientific inquiries. The logical deduction being that without the cavemen inventing fire, science wouldn’t be possible.
I’ve never read a more bombastic, boastful claim than the one you make about Christianity being a prerequisite for being able to perform scientific inquiry. I guess all the works of Ancient Greece, India and other cultures would be bulldozed into landfills by the likes of you.
You’ll rightly be laughed out of the halls of academia of repute if you went public with that claim and got anywhere (you won’t).
Have a wonderful day!
:^)