>It is interesting question why there are philosophers even today.
By the same reason that there are mathematicians today: both develop concepts and tools that can be used in science and real life,...
>If making new concepts it important, Deuleuze had to make his new concepts in the field of sicience or culture (people are wating new invention in this field), not in the philosophy.
Those worlds are not separate, philosophy feeds into science and culture, and gets inspired by both.
I think you need to realize that science is an offspring of philosophy, and that before the scientific method was formalized, both concepts where (con)fused. So it's not surprising that many old philosopher's stances sounded scientific but are not. Today it's much easier to avoid mixing both things.
Scientific theories are the elementary units of scientific knowledge. These theories are assemblies of concepts, many of which were first explored and developed by philosophers. This was true in the past, but remains true in the present. You just have to check the field of neuroscience or theoretical physics to see the close interaction between both disciplines: Borges was writing on the multiuniverse decades before the notion was formalized in quantum mechanics.
Philosophers develop and explore concepts. It's up to scientists to use or modify them to their needs. Same for the general population, they can reuse concepts to organize their lives or society.
>But today sicence and culture are developed so much so that they need no more philosophy.
That will only be true when science knows everything, and culture is perfect. I'm not holding my breath on that,...
>Do we believe philosopher's ambiguous theory more than sicientific well-examined knowledge?
One should not mix scientific knowledge with philosophical discussions. Which does not make philosophical discussions useless. They are a great mining source for new concepts.
>Sicience has its own method to tell what is truth and what is not. And we rely on it.
Science needs inspiration and imagination to build theories, and that's where philosophy can help.
>Do we need philosopher's dogmatic theory when we do a cultural thing (for example, to make a TV show or create a web site)?
Well,... Philosophy might for sure have an impact on WHY you do your web site, and most likely will also affect HOW you do it, since the HOW depends on the WHY. You must have some kind of philosophy grounding your actions, when you build a charity web site, for instance.