I am an orthodox Christian, ask me a question!

[Edwardo Piet]

and I am wondering where the evidence is for any objective 'truth' as in absolute truth - that we can absolutely know

I've already shown you the error there lies in this question. You cannot provide objective epistemic foundations for the existence of objective epistemic foundations, without begging the question or presupposing it to exist. Either you commit the fallacy of begging the question, or you presuppose it to exist on grounds of proper basicality (that it is integral in your epistemic structure), but since that contradicts a non-monotheistic epistemic structure, you are then in fallacy again.

No, because you are making an assumption. I'm not asking for objective foundations for objective foundations. I'm asking for evidence that comes from people, i.e. scientists, the scientific consensus - or any other valid evidence. It's not absolute proof, it's evidence. It could be wrong...I'm asking for a very strong subjective consensus if you want me to put it like that - which is as close to 'objective' that we have! No one sees things exactly the same, but overall it could be said to be objective because the evidence is so strongly rooted in the science.

I'm not asking for objective evidence for objective truth. I'm asking for any valid evidence for objective truth. Anything that is trustworthy.

Science is falsifiable, it's 'objective' in the sense it's backed up by an extremely strong - scientific - consensus. It's 'subjective' in the sense it is based on what people have found (imperfect people - no one's perfect) and isn't absolutely proven beyond a doubt.

If anything is objective, science is. There's a difference between absolute and objective. I'm asking for 'objective' evidence as in strong unbiased evidence - if it's ever fair for the word 'objective' to be used correctly, it is correct to say science is objective (on the whole).

I am asking for evidence for absolute truth, not just objective. And evidence for objective, specifically morals - or any objective 'moral values'. Because as far as I know there isn't any.

There is already evidence of objective truth in the sense of science, because that's as close to objective as we have. Absolute on the other hand we - at least as of yet - have no evidence of (as far as I know, enlighten me).

Read the first paragraph in this post if you want to understand why that question completely talks in another direction than what I meant with "objective epistemic foundations" for moral truth.

Well are you saying there are any? Because my question is, where is the evidence for them?

EvF