Science is a way of observing things, then codifying a theory that explains the observations. However, the same thing can be observed in several ways: such as electrons as both waves and particles.
Scientism, however, insists that only science can define what is true, and that everything outside of science is untrue. However, holding this supposition as absolutely true in itself is an unprovable supposition.
Until you guys get to the underlying RELIGIONS behind creation, you won't be able to discuss the pros and cons of the theory of evolution.
But how does discussion of Athena and Thor tell us anything useful about evolution?
A crude strawman. I am around scientists every day. I have never in my career heard anybody make this claim, ever. It would be a foolish claim to make, since anyone with even a peripheral connection to science sees previously accepted results being overturned regularly.
I will say that because of the self-correcting nature of science, the conclusions of scientific research do have a far more valid claim on the truth than conclusions reached by any other means yet devised.