We need to clear up some definitions here. I admit that I have faith in science, however it is not the same faith that you have in religion. If you look up faith in the online dictionary, the very first definition is, "confidence or trust in a person or thing: faith in another's ability". In that sense, I would agree that I have faith. I am confidant that evolution is the best explanation for the diversification of life, and I trust the evidence that supports it (fossils, genomes, ect).

But the next definition of faith is "belief that is not based on proof: He had faith that the hypothesis would be substantiated by fact." That is exactly what religious faith entails. You have a hypothesis, such as the flood, and you are faithful that you will find facts to support it. In science, we never put faith into our hypotheses. Scientific experiments usually have 2 hypotheses: the alternate and the null. A scientist is prepared to abandon the alternate hypothesis and accept that the null hypothesis is true if he or she doesn't find enough evidence. But you have no evidence for god, and you are unwilling to give up your hypothesis that he's out there. That, bigdog, is religious faith. Not faith in science.

By evidence of your name calling laddy boy, I believe it is you that needs to question yourself on wether you've been brainwashed to believe that we came from monkey like creatures millions of years ago or are you just choosing to be willingly ignorant to the fact of the advancing science that is causing your beloved monkey to man myth to crumble, and it leaves you left with the truth of the Bible, which you hate, and reduced to childish name calling.