To me, the arguments that point to the 'limits' of science to somehow prove that there is a God seem all to be based flawed logic. A not being B doesn't prove A is C. On the other hand, atheists of the variety that pretend we know everything, that it is all matter and laws of physics and mechanics and chemistry stemming from a big bang irk me. Not because their overall theory is necessarily wrong (I pretty much agree with it), but because they pretend that this is somehow true knowledge, the actual state of affairs, and the only valid way to see the world, when the history and theory of science, philosophy and such should have taught them a little humility in this regard. Knowledge itself is an elusive concept. Because no matter how deep you look, you will never find a 'foundation of certainty' on which to build your castle of knowledge. In the end it is all rooted in belief, customs, habbits, and our limited ability to discern patterns and apparent co-relation, no matter how far our theories reach and how good they are.
Blahcon! I agree with you! Well, the highlighted bit of course. Not all. I try not to just dispose of knowledge because I can't get my head around it. I try to understand it. Quantum coherence is the essential difference between classical and quantum theories - and to just disregard that and say "classical pyhsics is just fine" because they don't fit into one cohesive model I find rather narrow minded and absurd.