@SW-User Yet the argument can be made that what scientists called "proven evidence" all those years ago has changed immensely up to today. Some of the greatest minds in history believed the earth to be flat, including in Galileo's time, before who's discoveries the sun was believe to revolve around the earth. Is it not arrogance then to assume that what you know now is 100% true, when in a century or more, many of those facts may well have been altered based on new discoveries? Science is not so much about understanding the reality we exist in, as it is about trying to explain it to the best of their knowledge and ability. Specifically in the case of how humans came to be, unless they were there when these things happened, the best they have is a calculated guess, based on what is known at the time.
I am not saying that evolution as a whole doesn't exist. I think that it's quite obvious in nature that it exists, to what extent that is the case, I do not know. The whole debate between theism and atheism is in the end about how humans came to be, and whether or not our existence was the result of evolution or a conscious creation at the will of a higher power. Also, whether there is anything more after death for humans. Those are the things that cannot be proven, until each of us faces eternity and finally knows. The way I see it, I'm either right or I'm wrong. If I'm right, great. If I'm wrong, then I'll likely just not exist anymore which is a win-win either way.