This is a false portrayal of the dark matter vs modified gravity theory controversy. No scientist is saying that the universe is wrong, as that would be equivalent to saying the the truth is false. Scientists don't know for certain why the stars in the spiral arms of galaxies orbit the center of their galaxy faster than the standard theory of gravity would predict. They are trying to find out what the reason is, and they are reserving final judgment on that reason until enough evidence has become available.
That's how science works. Having to accept uncertainty, learning to live without "absolute" certainty, is a strength that is often misconstrued as a weakness.
The better measure of a purported method for seeking truth, whether it is scientific or religious, is how much it has increased the powers of mankind over time. Valid methods for seeking truth do that because useful truths are a subset of all truths, and it is a subset in which people have a particular interest and to which they devote a considerable amount of their time. Any method for seeking truth that really does work will discover useful truths often, and the powers of men will grow thereby.
Conversely, if all that a purported method for finding truth has ever done is spin unprovable fantasies about a deity and an afterlife, intended to comfort people as they are dying, but which fantasies are in conflict with each other about fundamental issues (e.g. Christian doctrine vs. Muslim doctrine), and they do not discover any useful truths that increase the powers of men, then most likely that method for seeking truth doesn't really work.
The basic difference between science and religion is that science treats truth as something to be discovered, whereas religion treats truth as something to be decided (or revealed by other people who did the deciding). The practical consequence of that difference is that different religious groups will come up with religious metaphysics that disagree with each other on the most fundamental level, whereas science will lead different groups, working independently of each other, to the same conclusions, after enough data has been gathered to identify the hypothesis that is most likely correct.