I agree with much of what Larry Kluth says in his letter about truth and science, but there are still a quite a few questions to answer. In doing so, it is important to the discussion not to adopt the same attitudes toward truth as those we are trying to enlighten -- namely, blind faith in what others, supposedly better informed than we are, tell us. The questions are: where, when, how and why; why being an especially vexing one.
So, one question is, where, when, how and why did the exquisitely complicated properties of the elements arise to enable them to function as they do?
A parallel question is, where, when, how and why did the exquisitely complicated laws of the functioning of the universe arise to form the matrix in which the elements function as they do?
One can go on a good bit yet in this direction without in any way invoking the similar but more searching questions pertaining to the overwhelmingly complicated laws governing life processes -- it is not at all necessary, however, to get into that -- for we cannot even conclusively explain the answers to the obviously much more elementary questions asked above.
Thus, the issues of evolution, mystical creation, big-bang, faith and the like are all red herrings drawn across the trail.
For myself, I see the many questions and few answers as pointing to a single agency that created the universe, said agency being called whatever you like, I do not care, not at all. The questions are still open, however, with the answers sometimes seeming to rapidly recede from the horizon, what with there being apparently no answer to the question, "Why?"
Allen N. Wollscheidt, Payson