George, have you trained in research methodology and statistics? Have you carried out research? Have you won a Nobel prize in any area of science? I've done the first two, and Steven Weinberg the third.

Yet, more than 20 years after he won the Nobel, he was shocked when a friend pointed out that science doesn't explain ANYTHING, it merely describes certain measurable features of our conscious experience. He was even more shocked after seeing out to write an essay to disprove his friend and realized it is correct that science is not equipped to explain anything

Further science as currently practiced does not have any evidence that consciousness even exists. Neural correlates yes; experiential consciousness, no. And without consciousness we would not know the universe exists.

Therefore, strictly speaking, science cannot provide evidence the universe exists without the first person reports that themselves are not considered to be evidence.

You have repeated a remarkably concise litany of all the logical errors the people who don't understand science OR religion commonly repeat.

I have a suggestion for you. It may hurt a lot at first, since you're not used to it. But try it:

Think. Take a few months before responding (I know, this is online and nobody can bear to wait even 3 seconds before their amgydala commands them to respond). Reflect on what Weinberg realized, even if you don't understand what I wrote. It will improve every aspect of your life.