And of course the naysayers count all the "maybe" and "could have" qualifiers and try to infer that science knows nothing. We are then expected to believe that since science knows nothing, it can't rule out even the most patent nonsense.
Of course. The problem is that non-scientists don't understand the reasons for scientists being so reluctant to assert anything. It's not that we don't know anything, it's that our interpretation of an observation can so easily change, for a number of reasons.
I'm well aware that the devoted creationists don't want to understand why we scientists apparently flip-flop and disagree so much; the only reason I participate in these is because the arguments keep me sharp. I don't expect to convince someone who doesn't want to let go of their cherished misconceptions!