All of which is good and well, but I am not making an argument for science, I am making an argument that a truth holds no universal claim. It something that you believe or recognize to be true. You cannot vote truth. You can say someone is wrong, but does that necessarily change their opinion, do you change their opinion? No they do. You could say green is green all day, but they could say green is red and they could believe it to be true and if you were to ask them if it were true they would say yes. In their reference frame green is red. In their reference frame, the laws of physics may not even exist. Because a truth is an idea, and all of our ideas are inherently flawed no two frames of references will hold all the same truths. So which frame of reference is true? Both of them to their respective holders.
Science does not prove green to be green. It proves that a certain wavelength of light will be perceived the same way as long as a reference frame has not been changed. For example, in reference frame A the length of a photon could be 1032 nanometers but in another frame of reference it could be 531 nanometeres easily, depending on the physical attributes of that reference frame.
If there is an absolute truth, again I don't think there is a scientific argument for absolute truth, because there is no evidence explicitly saying there is or even suggesting it. In fact, even if it does exist, science definitely suggests that we will never know it, for it could exist in some demension we could not comprehend, as we only live in 3.