Apparently, it's summation time.
I'll stick mainly to my points about language, and probably leave the other (very interesting) stuff that's come up to other participants.
I object to this:
Science doesn't ask/answer "why" questions, because it's a completely false statement, and I hope we won't see it again on EvC!
Equally to this:
The proper use of "why" is for questions of purpose.
Again, that's demonstrably wrong, and I hope this thread has destroyed the misconception for all time in our little community.
I hope I and others have succeeded in explaining why those statements are wrong to the doubters (who were few, as I expected).
Initially as a side point, I mentioned that, as well as addressing why questions concerning reason and cause, science actually does address questions relating to purpose in a number of fields. Archaeology is an obvious example, but the cognitive sciences are certainly concerned with purpose, including questions about intent and purpose themselves, what they are, and how and why they came about in our species and others.
It was things related to that side point that have produced a lot of interesting discussion, and could perhaps merit a spin off thread.
So, over to you "questions about purpose in science" debaters, and thanks to all who participated in the thread in any way from any angle.