it may be true that some form of control is necessary for some people. maybe religion is the control mechanism that has evolved to best accomplish this. doesnt make it true tho.
Clearly it is unable to answer all questions, meet all needs or, again, we would not be having this conversation. Oh sure, you might choose scientism because it is more utilitarian than other worldviews, but you're still making a value-based, ie. emotionally-based choice.
That's certainly true enough. Of course they sometimes find out later what they considered to be fact was wrong all along too. Not to even mention there are plenty of things science doesn't even know to begin with.
Things boil down to whatever might be wrong is inevitably only going to be found out by the scientific method, which doesn't merely rest on ideas of fanciful sky beasts. It's the only way vast and practical knowledge and an understanding of the workings of the universe, has ever been able to be accomplished. Religion depends entirely on not knowing, and does not essentially want to find out how much it is wrong. Stephen Hawking is obviously right . It's nothing to do with saying God or a Creator doesn't exist, that's a pointless argument as much as any mythical claim is. Thing is, the universe provides the knowledge and information that shows how a deity, a Creator, a God, is not required.
A cross-dressing male makes himself look like a woman. This man APPEARS to be a woman. This is not evidence that the man is in fact a woman. Appearance is not evidence.
exactly. to the bible writers it appeared that when they prayed it rained. that was not evidence that a god made it rain.