But getting back to science, keep in mind that the scientific method can never prove anything. Even Stephen Hawking will tell you this about theories. The best one can say is, he might have the correct theory but no one can ever be absolutely sure. The scientific method is a great tool for inquiry but it will not give you a definitive answer because all theories must be refutable. So the scientific method helps us to learn by disproof, not by proving anything true.
Once again, you miss the difference between faith and science. Yes, the scientific method is used to constantly question and extend our knowledge. As we learn more, we question more, and learn more again. As technology gets better, we can test even more things, challenge even more things, getting closer and closer to the truth. All of this depends on logic, being able to actually make new predictions that can be tested logically. This is how we build on knowledge.

The major difference, as I see it, is that you are totally invested in the search for absolutes, of things that never change, things you can latch onto and never let go. Unfortunately, the universe we live in is all about change. To the logical, change is a challenge, something to be welcomed. To the faithful, it is something to be avoided and defended against. Worse yet, each religion and subset of religion latches on to different things and defends different things.

How is what you believe really any different from what, for example, the Romans believed? Neither group can defend their position any better than the other. Each has their own absolutes, neither can "disprove" the other's absolutes. This is faith.