You are persistently incorrect in you claims that scientific theories can, are or should be "proven". I and others have repeatedly given you both logic reasons why scientific theories cannot be "proven," and have provided you with historical examples of scientific facts and theories that where once considered as strongly verified but later proven incorrect.
I'm not going to engage in the wearying task of reprising those arguments or examples. (Three days from now, true to your inimitable form, you would just be pretending you never heard them and repeating the same arguments and assertions unmodified.) Instead its your turn to demonstrate your claim:
Please list three substantive theories, from any branch of natural science, that you consider to be demonstrably "proven".
The difference between science and philosophy is that science gives proof of its assertions. Your statement that any hypothesis is science regardless of proof is utterly ridiculous. Just because evolution cannot give any proof of its assertions either in the fossil record or in any other way, does not mean that real science does not. Science proves its theories with repeatable experiments, calculations, predictions and practical applications. Evolution can do none of those, therefore it is not science.