No reason justifies disbelief.

[bennyboy]

Again. . . this is an idea that you've introduced, and you're commenting on it as though I said it.  Did I say hasn't = can't?

I would say that if you want to assert that science can answer all kinds of questions, then you'll have to demonstrate this to be true.  As you know, I'm perfectly willing to demonstrate that the evidence is against science answering certain kinds of questions: because of the nature of the question, and because of the nature of science.

Why do I think science cannot explain psychogony?  Because we are limited to objective observations, and mind is subjective.  You can't examine a mind in the lab.

-and yet it's an active field of research

The field of research does not explain (or for the most part, attempt to explain) why there is mind. Nor can it identify what physical structures or processes are capable of subjective experience.

Why do I think science cannot explain ultimate cosmogony?  Because it's limited to material observations from within the Universe, and because we have no reason to believe that limitation can be transcended.

-and yet it's an active field of research

The field of cosmogony deals with the Big Bang and the unfolding of events as the Universe expanded.  It doesn't explain why there was  Big Bang, or by what mechanism it could have unfolded. At best are speculations about Cosmic Foam or multiverses, which are about as scientific as God claims.