(May 9, 2025 at 12:37 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote:The first part is car crash funny, since the exact opposite is true. the second is yet another false equivalence. Objective evidence is far more reliable than eyewitness testimony, which is notoriously unreliable, precisely because there is no check on subjective bias, and subjective interpretation, unlike science.(May 9, 2025 at 12:29 pm)Nay_Sayer Wrote: We've now reached a point where John is trying to convince people evidence is a bad thing.
It's certainly bad science practice. It may be useful in courtroom, but that's not exactly a great endorsement.
How any of this remotely evidences, or is a sound reason for, belief in any deity, is anyone's guess. If one removes objective evidence, and rely only on subjectively biased interpretations, one could of course believe anything, but then its clear that this is exactly why John is peddling this nonsense.
