What are the basic "unproved" assumptions of science?
This isn't philosophy, moving to GD.
This question is also too broad. You will need to state examples that you are questioning.
Isn't philosophy?! And exactly what would you categorize it as? An inquiry into the 'a prioris' of science is 100% a philosophical inquiry falling under the category of epistemology. In fact, it's one of the hottest philosophical topics being addressed in academia. Do names like Kuhn, Popper, and Feyerabend mean anything to you? They weren't exactly writing hikers' field manuals.
But perhaps you were right about my needing to provide examples. If I wanted to start a discussion about the philosophical underpinnings of science, I probably should have been more explicative.
Your one and only sentence was
We have standards for what qualifies as an acceptable post for philosophy and that doesn't cut it.
I suggest you read the Philosophy Forum Guidelines to understand what is required.
Separate names with a comma.