The proof is conditional upon an assumption.  You are averring to the unproven nature of the assumption.  Your detractors are averring to the proof which it conditions.  Of course both are right, and of course both are wrong, in differing senses.  Such a delightfully complex relationship there is between truth and interpretation.  This is how I can be both a relativist and a fundamentalist, so brisk and liberating is it. Thank you for reminding me.