People asserting "it's just a rock are more anti-scientific than people asserting it might not.

Likelyhood of something = assertion.

“It’s just a rock” is a closed conclusion. “It might not be” is an open hypothesis.

Avi Loeb has given it a 30% chance it might not be just a rock.

Most mainstream scientists are too cautious to even assign ANY number.

So why are you asserting a 99%-100% probability? It's not scientific, it's subjective, consensus-weighted judgment, not a hard, data-driven proof

Saying “most scientists treat it as probably natural” ≠ claiming 100%