[Fester Chugabrew]

But you said there was NO WAY TO CHOOSE between the two that wasn't better than the other.

The choice resides with each observer. Some make their choice blindly and do not allow their point of view to be challenged while insisting their point of view is the only one supported by the United States Constitution. Others weigh the evidence as it comes at them and then choose which general understanding is more explanatory. Some people are even capable of seeing things from more than one point of view. Can you believe it?! Since neither approach to science is falsifiable, we'll have to make do with either approach or some admixture of the two. Just as there is more than one way to interpret and explain the motions of the planets, there is more than one way to engage science.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

" The choice resides with each observer."

It is not an objective choice then. It's not a scientific choice. They'll have to use something other than the evidence to make their choice. Perhaps they could read some tea leaves.

"Others weigh the evidence as it comes at them and then choose which general understanding is more explanatory."

They must do this extra-logically because you have already agreed that there is no way to make a weighted choice in this matter.