More and more theories become testable, and are refined because
the test equipment becomes more sophisticated, or
better questions were derived from previous tests.
Correct. Also, more and more theories are rejected for the same reasons.
who is to say such questions pertaining to "origins" will not come from research into the unknown?
Much that was unknown is now known due to scientific method and observable facts; we now know more than ever about our origins and the universe because of it.
Perhaps one day we will unlock the secret of our origin, and will no longer need the idea of a creator or mystery therein.
rejecting the idea of an creator might turn out to be "not even to be wrong" too.. In the meantime
Is it not a valid topic contemplating, debating?
Rejecting a creator is correct until such time as clear and irrefutable evidence proves it wrong. Everyone seems to have their own take on it, which only proves people have an opinion.
Contemplating such is as valid as speculating the number of leprechauns there are.
Debating it in scientific terms has always been and continues to be foolish. Assuming one can speak in scientific terms that is