I wrote before about the difference between the mathematical meaning of “proof” and the “proof” needed to accept a scientific theory. They are different. To expect mathematical “proof” of any theory is neither possible nor how science works. It’s not an analogy–it’s a difference in the definition of the word. By your definition, there is no proof of ANY scientific theory at all. And thus no science.
Plus I’ll add once again that Ratzinger was giving a speech. He has no scientific training. His opinion on this matter, in this setting, is the same as any person who doesn’t have specialized education in the subject. In other words, your opinion or my opinion.
I’m not trying to “promote” anything. Those who wish to live in ignorance are perfectly free to continue doing so. There are a lot of people who believe in aliens, that the earth is flat, and that Scientology is 100% correct. I’m just not one of them.