Ah yes, the old "science can't prove anything, so my particular load of theological stuff is just as plausible as the geological record" argument.
This argument is much favored by people who:
1) Don't understand how science works
2) Do understand it, but resent it's findings.
This is fine in a philosophy class. But a science class postulates certain things and goes on from there. If you don't like where it goes, don't take science classes. Poetry is a perfectly valid field of study, for instance.
Luckily, there are still a lot of people who *do* value the benefits of the study of physical evidence, and will continue to bring us the fruit of their labors.
It's not "philosophy" when discussing what happened when there ARE REAL DINOSAUR FOOTPRINTS- WITH HUMAN FOOTPRINTS INSIDE OF IT!!
Unless of course you are merely philophising about the nature of the footprint-and matter, and if it is real or not..