[BBKing]

I think we have to clarify something about the difference between science and religion - one of the biggest confusions (deliberately, I think) in the whole creationism debate is to equate the position of a key part of Christianity with that of a small part of the body of science. I don't think they're remotely comparable in scope or size.

In particular the language used is important here -
proof:

'The Bible proves...'

'Science proves...'

Those usages equate biblical and scientific knowledge through terminology, and as say I don't think they're comparable. Scientific proof doesn't really exist as a concept, mathematical proof does and is much, much harder. Science tends to use hypothesis and theory, for very valid reasons, to whit:

All scientific theories are one step away from refutation, as they exist to lay out an explanation of observed phenomena on the basis of evidence and new evidence can come along at any time to upset the apple cart. In the case of religion no new evidence has come along for an awfully long time (ever?) hence religious beliefs are not open to refutation in this way. Hence scientific theories and religious beliefs are not comparable. Good scientists are willing to change or abandon theories in the face of new evidence. You quite often see religious anti-science arguments along the lines of 'you can't be right, you keep changing your mind, I don't change my mind, therefore I'm right'. I think this, as usual, misses the point.

belief:

'I believe in Jesus Christ our saviour'

'I believe in evolution'

Again equating biblical and scientific knowledge. I try and be careful to use belief to mean 'I accept this as so but I can't actually present any evidence' and prove to mean 'I accept this and have solid evidence I am willing to put forward to back me up.

I don't often use either word in fact, belief is too shaky and open to question and prove is too open to refutation. Science provides a decent half-way house, 'hypothesise' meaning 'I'm putting forward a view, here's the evidence I've gathered'. This separate word is required due to the emotional connotations of both 'proof' and 'belief'.

Going back to the start, therefore, if we are to compare biblical creationism with scientific evolution, we need to compare like with like. I'll leave as an exercise for the reader the rewriting of the Book of Genesis as a scientific theory, then we can compare directly. Alternatively rewrite On the Origin of Species as the Book of Darwin.

As a parting word on this etymological mayhem, the word belief really doesn't have a lot of meaning beyond the emotional - a police officer who went into a courtroom and said 'I believe the defendant did it' and didn't present any evidence would be told to get out and stop wasting everyone's time.