You have a theoretical framework, well defined, with a domain of application. This framework makes predictions that can be verified by data. That makes the difference between theories that are still considered by the scientists and those that are not. So far, standard cosmology is in agreement with all data at an enormous level.
It does not intent to describe what happened before t=0. It is not because it does not that it is wrong. As I said, each theory has its own domain of application.
In contrast to what you said to @apsu, my reality is not only me, or you, or whoever, but consists of data (facts), which may be counterintuitive (which does not mean they are wrong; it is not because you don't feel that something is like this or that that it is not). You can propose another paradigm, but this new paradigm should do as well as the currently adopted one if you want the scientific community to consider it fully.
Finally, as I said, science is not a matter of beliefs... This is left for religions.
I understand the scientific methodology, the concept of verification of theories, the proof and replication of experiments and so on. What I tried to explain is that this approach is one-sided and only outwards oriented. Our human experience but is on the edge of two planes: The external, the objective - everything we perceive in space and time, and the internal, the subjective, the mental, the self-aware, the origin of creativity, the reality beyond physics.
Mainstream science today can be seen as another religion because it believes that only what can be examined through its objective methodology is relevant whereas the metaphysical reality is completely neglected and ridiculed. Interestingly many of the genius scientists don't neglect the other side at all but admit that this is where their ideas, solutions and inspiration come from, and it's not about thinking but receiving. The subjective reality is not necessarily about believing but about knowing. Just because you can't communicate and proof something you experienced doesn't mean it's a matter of religion. It's an experience or an information that can not be translated into the objective plane.
Science certainly can also be practiced (and it was) on the metaphysical plane without being crippled by a methodology which is rooted in an outdated mechanical worldview. It's a matter of awakening.