The only situation I can think of where testimony overrode evidence was on that episode of the Simpsons where Bart skipped school and witnessed what really happened in a case where the Mayor's nephew was accused of savagely beating a waiter. Oh, but wait, the waiter's clumsiness that caused his own injuries could not be established until he actually displayed a careless pratfall in the courtroom itself. So Bart's testimony would have been worthless without that. Just a 'your word against mine' situation. How fucking hard is this?
Religions were invented to impress and dupe illiterate, superstitious stone-age peasants. So in this modern, enlightened age of information, what's your excuse? Or are you saying with all your advantages, you were still tricked as easily as those early humans?
---
There is no better way to convey the least amount of information in the greatest amount of words than to try explaining your religious views.
---
There is no better way to convey the least amount of information in the greatest amount of words than to try explaining your religious views.
