Oh look, it’s this garbage again.
Since it’s obvious that you never bothered to learn about this, scientists have published tens of thousands of peer reviewed scientific papers, documenting the ideas they’ve devised with respect to relevant questions, and in several cases, the ideas they have devised have been successfully tested experimentally. No “faith” needed in the case of those ideas, and furthermore, the ideas awaiting test were devised for sound, rigorous reasons, based upon what we already know in the realms of physics, chemistry and biology.
For example, we have:
[1] Cosmological physics: there are numerous models in circulation for the instantiation of the observable universe in its current form. A particular favourite of mine is the braneworld cosmology model produced by Paul Steinhardt and Neil Turok, which I favour because the two scientific papers describing that model include a testable prediction, centred upon the power spectrum of primordial gravitational waves. Which, incidentally, is why scientists laboured diligently to develop working gravitational wave detectors, precisely so that they could test that prediction, once the initial development and learning phase is complete. I cover this topic in some detail in this thread that I launched specifically for the purpose. Read it and learn something.
[2] Prebiotic chemistry: over 100,000 peer reviewed scientific papers from this discipline, document in exquisite detail the laboratory experiments establishing that every chemical reaction implicated in the origin of loife WORKS. The research in question has now moved on to successful experiments with synthetic model protocells. Furthermore, I was recently introduced to four peer reviewed scientific papers by a team of Japanese scientists, who established in their laboratory experiments that their RNA strands not only underwent self-replication, but generated a molecular ecosystem via Darwinian evolution. Again, I devoted a significant thread to this topic, and in my opening post therein, provided citations for 82 peer reviewed scientific papers relevant to the various sub-topics within prebiotic chemistry that have been the subject of research. Again, read that thread and learn something.
[3] Evolutionary biology: Over 1½ million peer reviewed scientific papers document in exquisite detail, the evidence for evolution. This includes successful direct experimental test and verification of evolutionary postulates, and replication of speciation events in the laboratory. Indeed, I’m aware of at least three direct experimental tests of evolution that can be performed in a high school laboratory. Even a cursory search of my output here on this forum, will reveal that I’ve presented, in detail, the contents of numerous peer reviewed scientific papers from the evolutionary biology literature to the audience here.
So, your assertion that scientists are purportedly clueless about relevant questions, is once again destroyed by recourse to the FACTS. As is your fatuous resurrection of the “faith” canard mythology fanboys keep masturbating over.