Nope,all possible science. Because it concerns itself with the physical universe, and like us is unable to go beyond its boundaries. By any physical measure it doesn't. That is correct if 'truth' = facts. But keep in mind that we are narrative animals. Everything is true for a given value of 'true'. No, you'd just believe. No more, no less. There is no right or wrong --it's a narrative; the sense you make of your life. It may seem that way, but it is not, because it can never scientifically be proven to be true either (which is why what the intelligent Design crowd practice is not science, even if they believe they do). There is no scientific argument for or against faith any more than there is for or against my liking chocolate, or thinking that Victorian steam engines are pretty. We live in two realms of existence: the physical universe in which things are and happen, and the psychic plain, which is our experience of this realm, ourselves and our life. We don't just think in facts; we think in story. We impose meanings and values. We do not just create our inner world; we see that it is good (or bad, or whatever). We are not Homo Sapiens, Thinking Man, but Pan Narrans, Storytelling Ape. The psychic realm --how we experience things and what they mean to us-- must be compatible with the physical world --what is and what happens-- to a large extent for our psychic realm to be any use, but some divergence does not practically matter (we can think of junk memes). What does matter is that our narrative, our memes, ideas and values are generally functional to our survival. Pragmatic use trumps factual accuracy. If the narrative your neighbourhood Crazy Cat Woman™ imposes on her experience allows her to stay functional in this physical universe, then it's all good as long as her brain is concerned. Whatever gets a lonely, alienated woman through the day. We see this clearly in children who grow up in extremely dysfunctional or traumatic environments; the narratives they develop --and hence the behaviours and relationships they form-- may seem crazy to us, but it helped them survive in extreme circumstances. Religion is just another narrative. Whatever beef you have with it, it is generally functional. We know this because superstitious thinking is wired into us evolutionarily, religion still exists and so do the people who believe in it. Real or imagined, true or false, good or bad: it works (for a given value of 'works', of course). Science is a different narrative; much better suited to the facts, hence much better for some of life's quandaries (but not all), but it has been around for only about 0.05% of the time that religion has. So give it some time to let evolution decide whether it can now supplant one narrative with the other. Meanwhile consider your own narrative. The love you feel for your wife, your kids --we can explain it scientifically as a combination of biological reproductive instinct and attachment; limbic drives that ensure the continued existence of our species, the end product of electrochemical activity in your neurons and hormonal glands. But your love feels real, right? It feels true.