I am sooooo tired of this sort of tripe. Evolution (a series of successful adaptations leading to successful reproduction) has been proven by so many independent vectors that it's just not up for discussion. It's even been observed in real-time over long-term experiments with microbes, fruit flies and birds, and so much more. Human evolution over the past several million years has been proven in the fossil record (a museum in Ethiopia has many fossil skulls covering many intermediate steps to Homo Sapiens) human DNA, DNA of human parasites etc ad nauseum.
As for the know-it-all professor, Richard Dawkins recounts a story from his university student years where a professor taught that X was truth and that thus shall it ever be! A visiting lecturer to that professor's class showed that new data had disproved X and that Y was the new, tested and proven paradigm. The professor walked up to the visiting lecturer, shook his hand warmly, and thanked him for showing him the error of his ways. THAT is science in action and practice: an exacting methodology that is open to examination, to being tested repeatedly as being true or false by anyone interested in doing so, and adding to the volume of knowledge.
Science is honest in that theorems are accepted provisionally, i.e. they are considered the best description/predictor until better data and better theorems emerge. Newtonian gravity will still get us to the moon and beyond, but Einstein's theorems are much more accurate and are considered better (your GPS would be miles off if it did not take Relativity into account in it's accounting). Every scientist with a Nobel Prize in his/her sites would love nothing more than to disprove currently-accepted theorems. Can any other method of explaining the natural world claim to be as honest and open to facts that contradict what is accepted and moving the goal-line forward?
Discuss.