However, the dilemma to which I referred was the one wherein I must decide how to answer Hawking's question. As I see it that is not science, but scientism. By the way, I think there is something to be said for the unprovability of non-existence. Proof, logic, reason, thinking, knowledge pertain to and deal only with that which exists. They cannot be applied to that which does not exist.
Nothing can be relevant or applicable to the non-existent.
The non-existent is nothing. A positive statement, based on facts that have been erroneously interpreted, can be refuted - by means of exposing the errors in the interpretation of the facts. Rational demonstration is necessary to support even the claim that a thing is possible. It is a breach of logic to assert that that which has not been proven to be impossible is, therefore, possible. An absence does not constitute proof of anything.