As does the term "universal law of gravitation". Does that make gravitational theory not a science?
One of the problems with Darwinism is that it is assumed to be true
That is, to the most casual observer of the scientific process, obvious balderdash. Evolutionary theory undergoes a new, and potentially falsifying test every time a bulldozer scrapes into a metamorphic rock face.
(and it's assumed to be true because the alternative -- special creation by God -- is unacceptable for materialistic scientists
This is also obvious balderdash, under even the most casual of inspections. Science has no official position on creation, special or otherwise, and nothing prevents prominent biological scientists, such as Johnson, from having profound religious beliefs. It is only in the minds of biblical literalists that biology and religion are in a throwdown match for supremacy.
the great body of scientific literature you appeal to is far from infallible.
Unlike the case with unshakable religious conviction, science takes it's fallability as a cornerstone of our confidence in it. That's why we keep hiring scientists to test things. Does your local church hire skeptics to test your faith, and provide a publishing forum for them to air their suspicions?
Don't have to!
The world does that for free!