Oh come on Crash. Of course, we can argue about inconclusive positions. If there is a lot of evidence for both sides an really interesting discussion of it all may be a way to arrive at some sort of conclusion.
It may also be away to find that we simply don't have enough evidence to get both sides to arrive at the same tentative conclusion but maybe will figure out what is needed to pick between them.
If there is very little evidence then there isn't much good having an argument. That is, if the proposition is VERY inconclusive. As DNA points out if it is completely "conclusive" then there is also not much room for argument. (Though that hasn't stopped the YEC'ers has it?
)
As for the life as we know it thing I'd say it is in the too little information available to do more than arrive at a "We don't know, let's wait and see" position.
I think you both are approximately are at that position but neither of you seem to be able to keep from making a step (with no evidence) to where you'd like the answer to be.