You come to an intersection and there are two wrecked cars, broken glass, skid marks and people injured, you know that there was an accident but it is not clear how it happened or who was at fault, that remains to be determined. At no point is there faith involved unless you start making up stories without the necessary information, yet assume that you have the truth, it being that assumption of truth that becomes an article of faith.
If there was 3 witnesses to that wreck, you're gonna get 3 different stories bout what happened.
A scientist would pick one, declare it proven, and run ta get funding with it.
True faithful believers would back that scientist's delusion/conclusion on internet forums.
I wasn't talking about witness testimony alone, often being notoriously unreliable, but the overall evidence...perhaps there was a CCTV camera, the skid marks provide information, witnesses may completely agree on some points, etc.
The point being, it takes investigation to come to the truth. Even then, some details may be lost.
