Oh, sure.

I think science, done right, looks at those kinds of things and admits they're question marks, whereas religion tends to instead provide an unverifiable answer answer.

It's reasonable for scientists, without wholly understanding all details of evolution, to say about parts of it: we think this works this way, because that jives with these five things we know are true. But it's just our best guess. We're going to generally proceed as though it were true, because that has a good chance of leading to interesting lines of research, including some that might disprove that best guess and help us make a better guess.

Granted, that's my sort of idealized version of science. I know there are people out there who seize on a theory and defend it religiously even in the face of evidence which contradicts it. In my mind those people have jumped from the science boat back to the religion boat, albiet a religion boat full of lab coats and purple rubber gloves.