You are projecting your version of justified belief.
I don't think you know what projection means in the psychological sense. Projection is when I accuse you of what I do, or when one has an intuition of a deity and projects it from his mind onto reality.
My version of justified belief is the one from critical thinking - a sound conclusion derived from the proper application of reason to the evidence of the senses, one that is demonstrably correct and can be used to predict future outcomes. Faith-based beliefs meet none of these criteria and can do none of these things. Thus, evolution, which meets these criteria, is a justified belief, just like expecting the sun to rise, but creationism, which meets none of them, cannot be used for anything legitimate. Likewise with astrology and astronomy.
I decline to accept.
Nothing was offered to you. And there is no expectation that my words would have any impact on your thinking. I don't expect you to ever hold one new idea after reading words like mine ever. I am merely defining how I use certain words and phrases.
Did you read my post? Did you understand it? One of the things it wrote was that there are many people who do not know what justified belief is or what makes it justified. Do you know what that means? How do you suppose your answer is understood? That you have a clear and firm understanding of what justified belief is, one that it differs from the one used in academia? Did you understand what I claimed that the Dunning-Kruger syndrome is, and how it pertains to discussions like these? If so, and there is no evidence in your reply that you did, do you think that that reply contradicts those words?
"No question can be answered by science". We can compute sunrise to many decimal points but there is virtually no practical benefit.
What you are saying is that YOU have been unable to identify any practical benefit from science. I have. I have solar panels on my roof, so my power has been free for several years. Many use the Internet every day to benefit. Science lights up a house lit up at night without using fire. Science is probably why most of us never got polio or small pox. I guess either you didn't get those benefits or didn't notice that you had.
What have faith and religion taught mankind? What do we now know about whether gods exist or not because of religion? We have learned nothing about angels and the afterlife, nor anything else.
More correct than your comment is that only empiricism can answer questions, that is, add new knowledge. Not all questions can be answered that way, but no question can be answered any other way. If a question cannot be answered by consulting physical reality, then it can't be answered. It's a common mischaracterization to transform that claim into one that science will answer all questions.