The scientific method has been vastly more successful at telling us what's real than the methods of religions. The reason being that imagining how the universe should be, or armchair philosophy, is no substitute for going out and taking a look at how the world is. There are a billion things I can conceive of in my imagination, but I have no reason to suppose that all or any of those things is real.
The point is that if science doesn't have any hope of ever answering a given question about reality, religion and mysticism don't stand a chance of answering it.
We can sit around imagining Vishnu, Amaterasu, the primordial being Ymir, etc. and many people have believed in these gods. But there is no evidence that any of them is true. Even if you assumed one was true, how would you decide which one is correct if you were coming to planet earth for the first time? What methodology would allow you to discern the truth?
Vast numbers of people today believe Hinduism, Islam, Supernatural varieties of Buddhism, and Judaism, and each group believes with the conviction of faith that their way is the truth. They all claim that their version of a god or gods is true, and they all find confirmation all around themselves for their beliefs. That's how confirmation bias works.
But what technique would allow you to separate fact from fiction?
You may believe that someone of a different religion is wrong, but he or she believes just as confidently that you are wrong.
The skeptic looks at all these beliefs and finds no objective evidence for them and treats them in the same way as pink unicorns and sapient doughnuts monsters.