Who cares about such a rhetorical question. Point is that scientific laws work, work reliably and many are the basis of further laws which have been found to work reliably. They are very good and for you or others to dismiss them is to dismiss all of science and indeed all of modern society. You must destroy all that civilization has accomplished in order to deny the laws science has discovered.
It is a strange philosophy you adhere to which to be 'real' must destroy most of the reality around you.
I think this is unfair (ref throws flag). Godel showed that even mathematics is incomplete and inconsistent: there exist true mathematical statements which cannot be derived from the axioms and postulates of mathematics. Thus Hilbert's great goal of showing mathematics to be both complete and self-consistent was proven impossible.
Nevertheless.
I'd nominate (some of) the laws of Thermodynamics, Newtons laws of motion [over the entire range of values in its domain], Einstein's Special and General Relativity [over the entire range of values in their domain], and QED and QCD.
Show me a counterexample!
About the only biggies with big holes in them are cosmological. There is not (yet) a Theory of Everything (unification of gravity with quantum mechanics), or an understanding of 'dark matter' and 'dark energy'. Thus we cannot explain the apparent acceleration of the universe's expansion.
The 'inflationary universe' seems very likely to be true but I have never seen an explanation for inflation. Maybe I don't read enough.
Nobody's seen a Higgs boson (yet). Or a graviton. Or a quark. But quarks almost certainly exist, based on certain experimental results which match the predictions of the quark-ologists. Whether quarks are fundamental or consist of still smaller and unknown objects is open to conjecture.
The other big "holes" (sorry) are the nature of singularities and whether or not there was a singularity at the origin of space-time.
--Boris