Heberews 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.
Science isn't based upon faith - but upon evidence. I have faith that God is; I have a lot of evidence that natural selection is the mechanism whereby living things evolve.
Legit science isn’t based on faith. But we’re talking about the theory of evolution, not legit science.
Science = systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation or experimentation.
Microevolution (relatively small variations that can cause the formation of a new subspecies) is observable so it’s science. Macroevolution (formations of entirely new species) is not observable so it’s not science. If it was, we’d be drowning in evidence. The missing evidence is replaced with extrapolation, air and sometimes outright fraud.
However, I think you would admit that having "a lot of evidence" does not necessarily mean having ALL the evidence - the whole story (hence my tagline).
I admit that I muddied the waters of discussion by moving from evolution to origins. However, the point remains.
Certainly we can make extrapolations - even broad assumptions - from the evidence at hand. However, if we accept the idea of a creator, by default then, it behoves us to explore the idea that things may not be as they seem.
In this world, we see a finished product (creation). How we arrived at this product is of course the debate. How would our DNA appear if we were plunked down in the Garden vis-a-vis Eden instead of having been the product of natural selection?
What parameters can we put on the creator? What process does a creator use in the formation of a body, a planet - or the universe. The question really is: what does creation look like?! Must the creator conform to our requirements - or must we discover his?