Scientific theory is different than conjecture. A theory as almost a fact, save for it being untestable.

A law is a fact (through our understanding), a theory is a theory.

There are certainly sound theories for the existence of god, such as our lack of understanding of how we came to be (going back to the creation of the universe) - highlighted in a previous post: even if the big bang was the cause of the universe as we know it, what caused the big bang?

People who discount science are stupid, though and I will say straight out that they are douchebags

Empirical theory is different to regular theory like you say, however a theory must be testable and falsifiable. Big Bang is actually a Scientific Model, not a theory.

Theories are not made through deductive logic. Theories are made through induction (inductive logic) from a body of observable evidence. Ergo, there are no theories of/for god. There are hypotheses sure, but not theories.

This is true for empirical theory only.
There are certianly many theories for God.

You could even stipulate that inductive logic occured when someone thought of the idea of a benevolent creator. They observed life and made an induction

It's just like saying if God/Elohim/Yahweh/what ever you want to to call him, created everything then who created God?

Exactly.
Science and Religion both have their limits.

If you take christianity as an example, their God is omnipresent and thus would exist everywhere in time and space simultaneously.

For all we know, God could have been created by theists imagining him. They since imagined him as omnipresent and thus he actually outdates theism.