FFT

Just because two theories are equally unlikely to be proven absolute, they are not equally valid. There's evidence on science's side, and stories on religion's. They are not equally valid.

MageB420666

If you cannot prove something to be true then it does not matter if there is some "evidence" that tends to support it. Especcially when the controversy is about something that tends to be held outside the bounds of science. Two different religious beliefs are equally valid because neither can be proven right or wrong(most of the time, there are some cults and other groups that have beliefs that can be proven wrong). Just because science has some "evidence" does not mean that is any more likely to be proven true than religion is. For if religion is right, and god/goddess/whatever does not want us to know the truth then it could lay down a false trail of scientific evidence that "proves" that it does not exist.

Just because evidence at a crime scene points towards one suspect does not mean that the innocent looking guy you saw walking down the street with the full alibi(story) was not the real culprit and just framed the other guy.

It is because of this that I say that science and various religions are equally valid arguments, because neither can be proven true or wrong.

__________________
Apathy: The best outlook this side of I don't give a damn.