An often ignored angle in these discussions is that science cannot offer all the answers; it's a 'subset' of epistemology concerned with describing empirics, which you can use to your advantage toward some goal - but the point still remains that _you_ need to provide that goal. In other words, science only produces an educated guess as to empirical knowledge of our worldly circumstances - it should not be seen as an end in itself, because it will _never_ provide an answer to "what's the meaning of life?" or "why are things the way they are?", or even to "should we nuke everything on Earth?"
Sirs are British people knighted by the Queen, I'm just a normal guy; and no, leeching off other people's comments is not cool; but go bother An artist theory of..., if you have to
Scientific theories are only true to a certain degree and also only from a certain perspective. It's people that believe in science as something like an authority for truth almost in an religious sense. Before they used religion now it is relpaced more or less worldwide by science. The pattern stays intact though: people need an authority they can follow, that tells them what to think and what to do. That's why they like to see religions, cults, society and science as such an authority.
Science will explain everything given time! We need a theory that explains an emergent process relative to the atoms of the periodic table and individual wavelengths of the EM spectrum of light.
