To answer this question, I have to ask - "What is called religion? What is the definition of religion?"
If you want to say religion is just what you devote a lot of your life to, then I suppose science could be one, but that is not how religion is defined. see: Roido
Offtopic: WTF!! You got me almost confused... Why the hell are you using Nintendo's avatar?? Please don't tell me you're his next Wannabe wacko student!!!
No, in an ideal state, science is nothing like religion. Science uses empirical analysis to heuristically approach a valid, true, and useful description, explanation, and, at its best, prediction, of natural phenomena. Religion by definition relies not on empirical testing, but on a deeply held (and I wouldn't argue any less valuable) sensation of faith. The existence of the divine cannot be approached by a methodology of empiricism, so it isn't science. So, the two have nothing to do with one another. Now, if a scientist is so certain of his life's work, for instance, that he will hold to this, even in the face of evidence contravening his hard won postulates, he's no longer in the realm of science, or, more appropriately, he's in the realm of the unethical. That such happens doesn't make science religion; it merely removes the offender from the honored title "scientist." It takes courage, but science is open to empirical proof - whether that proofs casts your work upon the reefs of ruin or not.
Science is a method you use to figure out if something is true or not. It's about as close to being a religion as cooking is. I mean they're two completely different things. You don't worship in Science, you investigate. You don't pray in Science, you calculate. I mean to even identify one with the other is absurd. They're polar opposites.
Science is in no way a religion and never will be, religion is BELIEVING in something while science is backed up by proof and knowledge