No reason justifies disbelief.

[The Grand Nudger]

Can you present at least one example of some knowledge claim or method that doesn't? That's the thing that you keep missing, here, lol.  That's the thing that imperils the metaphysical as a set.  

Nobody's talking about metaphysics right now.  We're talking about whether there are important questions which science is not well-suited to answer.

That you defaulted to bitching about science after failing to present a single example of anything that belonged in the metaphysical or immaterial set is a matter of historical record, all one needs to do is go back a couple pages to see how this all began, Benny.

Whether or not there are questions that science isn't well suited to answer is immaterial to whether or not there is anything in the metaphysical or immaterial sets.  There may be, though it would be interesting to see how a person would know that or what those questions are, but if so that won't certify that there was a metaphysical answer or immaterial answer or that anything belonged in either of -those- sets.

Yes, Benny, we use science to answer questions of cosmogony.  Cosmogony is an active and productive branch of scientific research.  Were you unaware of this, or are you simply frustrated at the rate at which it answers questions, or which questions it hasn't gotten round to answering yet? 

The science of cosmogony doesn't answer the question I asked.  It's about how things unfolded once the framework was already in place.

Then, you misspoke?  You thought that science wasn't the proper tool for cosmogony, but in retrospect you know see that you were referring to something else?  

...idk...

...cosmogony...the branch of science that deals with the origin of the universe, especially the solar system.....

What does answer that question, then? This is what people have been asking you and other posters for some time. I think that the thread could use some elaboration there, because no amount of bitching about science or unanswered questions is going to explain, describe, or certify whatever that is.

What lead you to believe that science wasn't the proper tool for a subject that science is the most productive tool for?  What, for that matter, about the sheer existence of an unanswered question do you take to be indicative or demonstrative of the metaphysical, what other tool do you think is the proper tool, and by what means do you make any such determination or inference?

A simple understanding of the relationship between parent and child, and the fact that they cannot be conflated.

A simple understanding of the relationship between parent and child lead you to believe that science wasn't the proper tool of cosmogony?  It demonstrates or indicates to you that there is something metaphysical?  It tells you that some other thing is the proper tool?  It provides some means of determination or inference?