Fiddle, John. Science cannot disprove any such thing, because, as a hypothesis, it is not falsifiable. Furthermore it is the nature of science that ALL hypotheses are conditional until disproved in favor of a better one. Hell, the Newtonian formulation of gravity held sway for centuries and is only gradually being shifted by post-Einstinian exploration. This is a totally different approach to knowing from embracing a body of data based on its authoritative provenance -- the individual rather than the experiment.

Scientists accept a theory like evolution (not "believe" in it) because it matches existing data. You may recall that for several centuries, the mystery of blood flow in the human body was explained by adhering to the lessons of old Galen, the founder of much of Western medicine. His model was tides, into which humours were injected by glands according for the personality. When Harvey presented his circulation model to the London academy several hundred years later, it caused a huge uproar, but the evidence was repeatable and verifiable, and the model was surrendered.

You may find individuals who act reactionary or close-minded while still posing a scientists, but they don't represent the field very well.

A