Well, since George was at least somewhat impressed (thank you, George!) I should take the time to clarify and even correct a few hasty words of mine. So when I wrote ...
But in the end, it is still an opinion as to how we rate that evidence too. Objectivity is not in question. Our opinions may be, and science can help some with this.
Let me clarify that when I said Objectivity is not in question, what I really meant was that objective truth (reality) does exist as I'm sure we all here agree. And on the opposite token, our human appraisal of that reality can never be 100% objective. I.e. there is no question that pure objectivity on just about anything will never be attainable for the human mind. We get closer on some things more than others, yes -- and science is a strong player helping that to happen. But never complete. So when @T_aquaticus says that science is objective because it has established facts, I don't think it is quite that easy. Yes, there are many facts we are happy to consider established. But it is still going to involve opinion in at least some degree as to whether we accept a consensus appraisal of evidence or do we on this or that point strike out against the consensus? Perhaps hoping to forge revolutionary new paradigms (as Einstein did) or perhaps just mistrusting large bodies of experts or writing consensus off as conspiracy (as some science deniers today do.) Whatever your motivation there will always be opinion involved --hopefully well-warranted opinion if you are professionally pushing something, but opinion nonetheless. I guess what I'm saying here is that concepts like "opinion" and "fact" are really on a continuum without a hard dividing line to neatly separate the two. For useful communication we do agree to call lots of things facts -- those are the things that lots of the most accessible (empirical) evidence. But it still has just a smidgen of opinion since it isn't really 100% proven, and it is even more into areas of opinion when and how we choose to enlist any such fact and for what purposes. Objectivity is, I think, a high ideal that we rightly hold up not just with science but in general. And yet we (scientists included) will probably spend most of our lives mucking about in subjective things and with subjective motivations being human as we are even in the laboratory. We rightly try to reduce that as much as we can, but we never completely get rid of it.
That's all my drum-banging for tonight. Hope I didn't give anybody a headache!