In Michael Moore's movie, "Where to Invade Next" he interviewed some women legislators in Iceland & one of them said, "I wouldn't want to live in America. You don't take care of your people."

answered the persistent questions of children. the old men really had no way to know.

since no one was around through most of the history of the cosmos, who would know for sure?

We are all speculating about things like what is at the end of the universe, where do things go when they pass through time, what was here before the universe, what would be here if the universe disappeared...

Aristotle answered the question of how we exist with the idea of the Prime Mover. An excellent explanation if you don't ask where the Mover came from. or why we exist.

I find many of the explanations from theoretical physics, science fiction, and religion to be fascinating, but, like the blind men and the elephant, no one has the big picture. (Nor do I, should anyone think to ask.)

and the scientists who created the chart didn't have those countries available (Canada isn't there either, for instance)

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/6885439_Public_Acceptance_of_Evolution
http://ec.europa.eu/commfrontoffice/publicopinion/archives/ebs/ebs_224_report_en.pdf

We know because all the evidence works with a common ancestor, and has not been explained with any other hypothesis. Like we know about glacial periods, for instance. Things like geology, archaeology and palaeontology allow you to work out what happened in the past even without an eyewitness account.

has reincarnation as a central tenet.

I have no problem with any of the science that we have, or the conclusions it has come up with. But science can only rely on observable evidence as to how things happened. There are the ontological questions about why things happened that often escape it. And us.

Even random phenomena involve a choice-- was that choice an intelligent one or an accidental one?

and know the basics of the theory of evolution tend to support it strongly, but fewer know about it than in the USA. China and Russia were also in this survey - China follows non-God natural selection strongly, while Russia is closer to the British opinions.

https://ncse.com/news/2009/07/opinions-evolution-from-ten-countries-004885
https://studylib.es/doc/6133100/results-of-british-council-darwin-international

62% of Indians had heard of Darwin, compared to 91% in Britain, or 84% in the USA. Of those "who have heard of Charles Darwin and know something about the Theory of Evolution", in India 77% agree "enough scientific evidence exists to support" it, compared to 62% in Britain and 41% in the USA.

Among all respondents, so including the 38% in India who had not heard of Darwin, for possible species origins it was:

Life on earth, including human life, evolved over time as a result of natural selection, in which no God played a part
India 20%, GB 38%, USA 13%

Life on earth, including human life, evolved over time in a process guided by a God
India 32% GB 25% USA 32%

(those 2 combined would be, I'd say, the "developed from earlier species" option)

Life on earth, including human life, was created by a God and has always existed in its current form
India 43% GB 16% USA 43%

"We don't know, so God did it. No further investigation is necessary.", not so much.

Another question, why worship a "Prime Mover" that has no awareness of our existence? It wont listen to us, or grant us aid. It wont punish us, or anything else. Why even try to bother it?

That's on us who decide to worship it.

The cargo cults have a lot to teach us about ourselves.

The parable which gives a thumb nail sketch of the God System is the inappropriately named Prodigal Son. In it, we see that a source energy/God the father produces offspring or souls. The parable follows one's trek away from that world to the physical world where he/soul has to dwell amid unclean flesh/human bodies (reincarnation) until fit to return to its source/creator.

At no time does the creator have anything to do with the physical world. The physical world has its own overseer and manager. This is what Paul means when he says of course there are many gods, but only one supreme god.

If Christians want to say that this world was created by the lord of this world, that could possibly comport with Christian theology as presented by Jesus. To hold that the creator of souls is also the creator of the physical doesn't hold water.

This scheme is also reflected in the Hebrew scriptures. Genesis 1 shows a God who is unseen and works in a world of thoughts and ideas. This God's creations are perfect and therefore obviously not our reality. Genesis 2's god is hardly of the same calibre. It doesn't know everything. It doesn't exist in a world of thought, ideals. It has human emotions.

Both these creation schemes show the same thinking and are far closer to Plato and the Gnostics than the simplistic creation solution offered by some modern Christians.

The two can't coexist. Once you make the claim that God created the universe, you've qualified him.

...man created god.