Science is not religion. It is not discussed in the same terms as religion. Science can be wrong for decades. Nevetheless, it relentlessly converges upon an increasingly accurate model of nature. That's what the course corrections and revisions do. It's worked so far.
Against that, all the dogmatic religions in the world save possibly one--but I wouldn't bet on that and, anyway, who knows WHICH one?--are wrong now and will be wrong forever.
Ahhhh; you, too, have been touched by His Noodly Appendage!
Ramen! (Arrrrrr; shivver me timbers! Avast ye pasta-challenged infidels!)
In the case of Darwinian macro-evolution, it's been just over 100 years. It's nice of you to recognize that evolution may be wrong. Maybe we're getting somewhere.
Isn't that the entire point of the trial in Dover; that there is at least one competing idea about how life came to be?
Why are evolutionists so afraid of competing ideas?