Godless Dave said:
I think there's a big difference between a story and a description based on systematic observation of evidence and mathematical modeling. Our understanding of the Big Bang will be expanded and refined; many things that don't make sense now will be understood; some of the ways we explain things now will have better, more precise explanations. But this will be because of new research and new observations. Creation stories change for cultural reasons, not scientific reasons.
Creation stories don't generally correspond to the physical realities of origins. They tell us about the perceptions of the people who wrote the stories.
Culture will affect science in the same way. Our culture is very scientifically driven in the same way that religion once drove the ignorant masses, and, as you rightly say, culture eventually changed their creation myths. The reason why science drives culture today is because the people
allow it to based upon the supposition that
scientific naturalism can answer more questions than anything else.
However, if people change their supposition, the way science is used will be changed. Research on such innovative and broad topics could cease, and the scientific mind can be dulled. If such a thing occurs, science will be changed by culture. Furthremore, if a revolution occured in philosophy and philosophers were able to convince scientists that their methods are inferior to a certian philosophical model, then science would be forever changed.
Conversely, if science advances far beyond where it is now in how it gathers and interprets information, it may determine that any theory is bogus.