Let us suppose that to each of the previous nine questions you have given a clear, fact-based, scientifically valid and provable answer.
That leaves one more:
Having explained the origin of everything and the way in which, scientifically, you should be living your life, why should that make a scrap of difference to me?
In other words, how is it possible that one human being should be affected, let alone obliged, to act in any given way on the basis of anything that science can say?
Science may say ‘this is how it all started’; it may also say ‘this is why things are like this today’; science may also say ‘this is the most effective way to live a long and healthy life’. But why should that have any effect on me?
Can science tell me why I should be truthful? Can it tell me why I should be considerate? Faithful? Industrious? Fair? Non-discriminatory?
Science can say many things, but how is it possible to move from a description of what is to a prescription of what ought to be? In philosophy to make such a move is called the naturalistic fallacy.
And that is the problem. Science cannot have all the answers. It cannot take the place of considered thought about the nature of life and being because it does not have the tools to do this.
Even if science, keeping properly to its own methodology, could answer many of the ‘how’s above, it cannot explain how to live, or why what might be acceptable to one person should also be acceptable to another.
Science is supposed to deal with what ‘is’ and simply describe what that ‘is’ actually is, and how it ‘is’. But life’s questions of existence, meaning and purpose cannot be addressed in that way. Science may claim to have evidence that supports or cuts across some answers that philosophy and faith give, but it cannot ever replace them.
Unfortunately, practitioners of science and enthusiasts of science frequently claim far too much for the discipline. To believe that ‘science now has the answers’ is both to rate the level of science’s achievement too highly and to force it to try and do a job which, by definition, science can never do.