Can the "Theory of Evolution" be proven scientifically? Meaning can I use the Scientific Method to prove its validity? Or is there another way?

No scientific Theory can be proved - it can only be disproved. That is in the nature of science: a Theory is simply a Hypothesis that has satisfied many tests and defeated may attempts at disproof. However, a theory can be tested - and frequently is. The theory could very easily be *disproved* - by finding human bones in the same strata as dinosaur bones, for example. Or any other mixture of remains from what are regarded as widely differing times. You can also see evolution in action - for example, in the development of antibiotic resistance in bacteria. The large the species you want to see evolution in, the longer it will take, because it seems to take a few hundred generations for evolution to show up clearly. In bacteria, that may be only months; in mammals that is usually the better part of a century.

Science is about proof -- many scientists only state theory and some make a fortune out of stating theory as fact without any evidence. If you use fantastic numbers, trillions of years, and state theory as truth you can fool some of the people all the time.

The introduction to the centennial edition of Darwin’s Origin of Species (London, ) says: “As we know, there is a great divergence of opinion among biologists, not only about the causes of evolution but even about the actual process. This divergence exists because the evidence is unsatisfactory and does not permit any certain conclusion. It is therefore right and proper to draw the attention of the non-scientific public to the disagreements about evolution.”—By W. R. Thompson, then director of the Commonwealth Institute of Biological Control, Ottawa, Canada.
“A century after Darwin’s death, we still have not the slightest demonstrable or even plausible idea of how evolution really took place—and in recent years this has led to an extraordinary series of battles over the whole question. . . . A state of almost open war exists among the evolutionists themselves, with every kind of [evolutionary] sect urging some new modification.”—C. Booker (London Times writer), The Star, (Johannesburg), April 20, 1982, p. 19.
The scientific magazine Discover said: “Evolution . . . is not only under attack by fundamentalist Christians, but is also being questioned by reputable scientists. Among paleontologists, scientists who study the fossil record, there is growing dissent.”—October 1980, p. 88.

The “scientific method” is as follows: Observe what happens; based on those observations, form a theory as to what may be true; test the theory by further observations and by experiments; and watch to see if the predictions based on the theory are fulfilled. Is this the method followed by those who believe in and teach evolution?
Astronomer Robert Jastrow says: “To their chagrin [scientists] have no clear-cut answer, because chemists have never succeeded in reproducing nature’s experiments on the creation of life out of nonliving matter. Scientists do not know how that happened.”—The Enchanted Loom: Mind in the Universe (New York, 1981), p. 19.
Evolutionist Loren Eiseley acknowledged: “After having chided the theologian for his reliance on myth and miracle, science found itself in the unenviable position of having to create a mythology of its own: namely, the assumption that what, after long effort, could not be proved to take place today had, in truth, taken place in the primeval past.”—The Immense Journey (New York, 1957), p. 199.
According to New Scientist: “An increasing number of scientists, most particularly a growing number of evolutionists . . . argue that Darwinian evolutionary theory is no genuine scientific theory at all. . . . Many of the critics have the highest intellectual credentials.”—June 25, 1981, p. 828.
Physicist H. S. Lipson said: “The only acceptable explanation is creation. I know that this is anathema to physicists, as indeed it is to me, but we must not reject a theory that we do not like if the experimental evidence supports it.” (Italics added.)—Physics Bulletin, 1980, Vol. 31, p. 138.

Yes, this was all the proof I needed.

So I guess my next question would have to be, what kind of test (or process) would one have to run to figure out what did not happen at the beginning? And if it no such test exists, then should science be exploring that question, or leave it up to religion?

The theory of evolution has been validated more than most theories. It is as close to fact as you can get in a theory. Even though it is modified as more is learned. The scientific method is the best way to evaluate evidence. Scientific advancement would stop if it weren't for the scientific method.

No. It can't be proven. No one was there to see anyone evolve. It can't be replicated.

Is there another way? Yes. Go to a museum and look at the bones!