Evidence. Can't go there due to a prior committment

[Fred]

No problem.

So is what you're saying is that all evidence against materialism is dismissed for fear of nullifying it?

I'm saying that evidence for something outside the parameters of materialism is rejected by materialists out of hand on a routine basis. And to be clear, I don't mean rejected on scientific grounds, just rejected, period.

One of the ways this happens is the "heads I win/tales you lose" gambit. An experiment is done that does not show results outside of the statistical norm, heads I win.

An experiment is done that does show outside the statistical norm, and there must be something wrong with the experiment, tails, you lose.

When this is pointed out, the only response is, fine, well then what other evidence do you have? It never ends.

Of course, I am in no way implying that all the evidence that is offered is valid, because it surely isn't. I'm just saying that a hell of a lot more scientific progress could be made if the a priori stance of "if it doesn't fit, it ain't worth shit" did not dominate as much as it does.