There are indeed plenty of invalid questions and generally speaking the problem is that the questions often include assumptions, especially the ones starting with Why.
When one asks "Why X?" the question has two important implications that are often unjustified assumptions - 1. X is true and 2. There is a reason for X. There are contexts where those questions are fair - situations when X has been demonstrated to be true and when it is reasonable to look for a cause or purpose to X. Like asking "Why did she kick him in the balls?" when we know she indeed kicked him and the fact that she did it implies that she had some reason or motivation to do so. But asking "Why were we created?" for instance is a very different question because one can't definitively show that we were indeed created and we can't simply assume a reason or purpose when we aren't sure there is a conscious actor involved.
As you pointed out, one of the big problems with the way we ask questions about the large issues is flawed because of the type of answer we expect. It's not only that we want simple answers, but a huge number of people hate and do not accept "I/We don't know yet" or "We can't know for sure at this time" as valid answers while they are often the only honest or valid ones.
People want closure and want to live in a world they believe is just and well-ordered. That's unreasonable...
P.S.: You might want to check some typos like having word like discussing and being repeated twice.