Pete.. re: " I leave the doubting of operational science to atheists who think all came from nothing via no one."

Tell me which ones actually said that. Some 'may' think that, but most, like me, simply say they do not know! It is not so much a matter of asserting "something came from nothing", but of saying "I don't know... and YOU don't either!" The burden of proof is on the asserter.
Pointing to one religious book among many is not the kind of proof that scientists require. Some of them are comparing various arcane cosmological/physical theories based on math, particle physics...and sometimse just plain 'creative wondering'... to speculate about multiple universes, multiple dimensions, endless-loop collapsing/reconstituting universes.... etc. But none of them have anything like 'proof', and most will admit they might never get a comfortable answer.

It is theology which provides 'comfortable' answers.... or rather, dozens of answers comfortable to various people and cultures, most of which are just versions of "God did it!" Pretty easy, hmm? No more complex math or confusing measurements of astronomical phenomena! Wow... just some books translated from old manuscripts copied by fallible scribes who were usually just dedicated clerks who were told WHAT to copy. And what they copied were stories that served a purpose... sometimes political... sometimes psychological... sometimes coherent... sometimes contradictory- but all of which must "believed in order to be believed". And THAT is a paradigm example of "circular argument", "assuming the consequent", and a couple other fallacious bits of reasoning.

Pete... most scientists do not BOTHER to 'deny' those stories... they just don't 'accept' them..... they are busy trying to see just how much they CAN find out about everything.