“Believe in Science” is a phrase. At the end of the day, the reason it is NOT a religion is that it has no fixed precepts. It “evolves” (to use a phrase) based on our knowledge.
Back in the 19th century, Newtonian physics “ruled”. Now “Einsteinien” physics dominates. Who knows where we go from here.
Science is a journey of discovery. It is constantly disproving itself.
Religion is more set. For example, I believe in God. I don’t think any evidence is going to make me rethink that belief.
However, in God’s universe, I believe we have the capacity to learn new things.
Oh, it does too. It has one fixed precept. Philosophical naturalism is assumed 'a priori'. Absolutely every 'scientific' theory that follows is based on that one assumption.
Religion is simply a broad term for the philosophy that assumes that the supernatural is real and includes the natural. Science is simply the broad term for the philosophy that assumes that the natural is all that exists.
"It “evolves” (to use a phrase) based on our knowledge."
Reminds me of good old-fashioned Gnosticism applied to the philosophy of naturalism.