Occam's Razor, atheism, theism and polytheism.

[Simon Moon]

But not having a scientific answer to this, and any of the other questions you raised, does not get close for the need to invoke a god for an answer.

The list of things that were once explained by invoking a god, that are better explained by natural mechanisms, is endless.

The list of things that were once explained by natural mechanisms, that are better explained by a god, is none existent.

The list of things that we currently do not have a scientific explanation for, does not mean they fall into the latter list, by default.

Sometimes, the answer "we don't know yet" is the best answer.

I'll agree with what you said.  But the list of things that we believed were scientifically true at on time, we no longer believe to be so is long.  How many things that we believe to be scientifically true now will we not believe to be true later?  

Any of the things that we once believed we had a scientific answer for, that now have a different explanation, are due to science finding more information. That is one of the best things about science, is that it is self correcting when new information is discovered.

Also, why not try to find answers to questions in ways other than natural science?

If you come up with another way, that is equal to, or better than, the scientific method as a path to truth, please let the world know.

All I see from theists are 'methods' that are susceptible to: wishful thinking, confirmation bias, early life indoctrination, sharpshooter's fallacy, circular logic, etc, etc.

Please explain this other way you mention, and how it is not vulnerable to any of the above.

Why should I accept all scientific answers if they may be shown to be wrong at some later point?

As David Hume once said, "the wise man proportions his beliefs to the evidence".

Nothing in science is accepted with absolute certainty. All scientific beliefs are provisional.

Again, one of the major advantages of science over religion.