Considering it doesn't have any valid evidence, this means it cannot claim any knowledge or understanding at all rationally.
I said that if "evidenceology" had valid evidence to support its claims, then it wouldn't be bollocks, no. Just how any belief that has supporting valid evidence is rational.
EvF
I said that if "evidenceology" had valid evidence to support its claims, then it wouldn't be bollocks, no. Just how any belief that has supporting valid evidence is rational.
EvF


