No it doesn't. You at least have the possibility to "prove"/test scientific claims experimentally and prove mathematical ones analytically. You don't have that possibility with religion. You yourself can read the methods and results in the publication, you can draw your own conclusions from the photos, and one can replicate the experiments (more on that below) - since a lot of scientific work builds on previous work, if something upstream is wrong and not replicable, as a scientist it is discovered just by doing your job. If someone else's result is wrong (e.g. DNA theory of genetic inheritance) then your own experiment (gene splicing) won't work. Source: I worked as a research scientist.Believing in science takes as much faith as it does to believe any religion.
You don't need a lab to verify math or computer science publications, you can do that with your own head, pencil and paper. Even in the natural sciences you can read the methods and results, interpret the results yourself (does this photo/figure look like what they say it is), and sometimes the data/measurements are also provided in the Appendix so you can draw your own conclusions. There are also global databases that are used by labs worldwide, for example for genomic and astronomical data. If an expected result does not match the measured reality then that is investigated. There is also the filter of peer review - scientists are scrutinizing each others' claims all the time, especially for headline-making claims.there is no possibility for an individual to verify the claims of scientists
One way science is verified is when scientific results are transferred to industry and verified in the real world. If a scientific result is wrong then the technology built on it doesn't work: cars stop running, satellites don't work, communication networks break down, etc. Religious people are very selective with what scientific results they accept and what they don't, forgetting that much of what they use was first discovered in a lab. But beyond that, science is also self-verifying because the competing labs at the many institutions in competing countries around the world build on and verify each others' results. If one lab's dating of an object shows 12MYA and another's shows 12KYA, then that is put into question.Other than believing there is no way to personally prove there is evolution, the age of the Earth or Universe, the Big Bang Theory etc.
There's also the fact that in order to be a scientist you have to have the aptitude to actually do that kind of work and report it. As cynical as I am about science, I trust that the authors' whose work I'm reading are at least as competent as the industry standard. I can't apply that same standard to desert people 4000 years ago.