an idiot that has “faith” in a theory that has no tangible proof yet accuse Creationists of the same thing.
Of course, there is no scientific "faith", since to become a faith, science must be elevated from methodological to philosophical naturalism, and philosophical naturalism, by definition, is not science, it's religion.
Can I say that more simply?
Science is intended to be a box of tools, highly useful in building or repairing our material needs -- that's methodological naturalism.
But if we set our box of tools up on some alter, and bow down to worship it, that does not increase the utility of those tools, and makes us into idiots -- that's philosophical naturalism.
Nor does science ever use the term "tangible proof" relating to hypotheses and theories.
Instead, hypotheses are "confirmed" according to their ability to make strong predictions and withstand falsifiable tests.
Since basic evolution hypotheses have passed these tests many times, they are considered "confirmed theories".
And scientists do not have "faith" in a theory.
Instead, like other tools in their tool-box, scientists use the theory in every-day work, until it produces some result they didn't expect.
Then they sit down, scratch their heads, and begin work on some new hypothesis to explain their unexpected results.
That's what science is all about.