: It is wrong to suggest that because neither side has absolute proof then the
: two sides must be equally probable. If you combine that with the
: suggestion that therefore which version of events you think is most likely
: is merely a matter of your own prejudices... well I think that the
: combination is a logical fallacy.

Well, I never said each are equally probable. That would entirely depend on the details of whatever arguments are being debated. If the points are contrary, then it's impossible for them to be equally true since they're exclusive to each other; necessarily forcing the other to be untrue. If they're not exclusive to each other, then who knows, perhaps they are both probable, perhaps they're not. My point was that the only things we know are what we observe, and beyond that, we may interpret those observations to support an axiom, a framework which itself can't be known, only supported through evidence.

: Does it have a name? I couldn't find it with a quick google but it smells
: like a logical fallacy.

I agree, to presume that two points holding to contrary and exclusive positions are equally probable (that is, may both be true simultaneously) is a logical fallacy. :)