Faith is not the correct word. Science does inference and interpolation. Even Newton did this in devising his laws.
Not only did he make assumptions about missing data, he also fudged his raw data to make the theory look better to skeptics.
This is why science continually looks for confirming evidence, and why theories get modified by new evidence. Even Newton required revision.
Darwinists also do extrapolation. That is where the statemets of faith are. When they predict what will be shown in the future.
The Apostle Paul defined faith as the hope of things not seen. That is exactly what their statements of what will be shown at some time in the future are.
They are their prophecys. There is nothing wrong in believing prophecys. I do that.
That they choose to call them by another name is similar to the "a rose by any other name would smell as sweet".
They believed Darwins predictions or prophceys when he had no scientific evidence to support them. They see that some of his prophecies turned out to be correct, so they extrapolate that all will be proven in time.
Some more may be proven, but in the meantime they are using their political muscle to enforce their doctrine.
My request is just that they call a spade a spade and admit that they have faith in their Prophet. --- faith that he will be proven right in the end.
That is the way it is supposed to be, but Darwinists do not permit any unorthidoxy. They fight and use political muscle to enforce their views.
That is why they dismiss the idea of intellegent design out of hand and call anyone who even reads about it a heretic.
When was the last revision to Darwin's theory of evolution as interpreted by the "priesthood" of professors accepted by them?
Neuton's theory also has only been revised since he is dead and can't defend himself.
Darwinists fight feircely to defend their ideas. They do not discard anything.