Is Evolution a science or a faith?

[Harris]

We do not have to directly observe Evolution to establish it as a viable theory, although if we use species with a short life span such as bacteria or fruit flies we can observe evolution in action in these species. We use this data to create theories about dinosaurs or early hominids and we compare.

Problem here is that fruit flies have not shown any beneficial traits in the laboratory experiments.

The other problem in your post is you seem to have reduced the Theory of Evolution down to a few concepts that you think by 'disproving' you destroy the whole theory, well that's just not so. The theory of evolution is the convergence of many different theories that supports a bigger overall picture. This is a very common mistake made by religious debaters, by seemingly challenging one aspect of evolution you destroy the entire theory, well you don't. Science challenges itself everyday, how else would we improve.

Every scientific theory is a 'work in progress' and the sooner religious people grasp that concept and stop trying to disprove them on a whim - plus half an hour with Wiki - the better we will all be.

I agree “Science challenges itself every day,” but Theory of evolution is not a science it’s a postulate and a political dictum. Second point you made here that religious people undermine the scientific facts however, Thomas Nagel is not a religious person. He is an atheist. Read his book:

MIND AND COSMOS:
Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature Is Almost Certainly False

Oh, and as a footnote, the Oxford English dictionary is for finding explanation of words, it's not a definition of scientific theory or scientific method. Here's a much better use for your Oxford English Dictionary, look up 'banausic prolixity'.

It seems you have not read my post further than the meaning of science as given in Oxford Dictionary!