Belief and Knowledge

[Heywood]

Successful predictions -become- evidence. I suppose one could argue that this -does- "change the evidence" but I don;t think we'd really be arguing. I know what you mean (I think, lol) - so for me, no, making predictions does not "change the evidence" (things would be what they are regardless of whether or not any prediction was made, the evidence for whatever it was would be no different). The tough part is deciding between two explanations which -both- fit the evidence. There, successful predictions can be a trump card. There was definitely a point where the evidence available to us left the door open if faith is on one side and science on another (slightly absurd situation, but meh). If the predictions of faith had been as reliable as the predictions of science - the method we use to do science would have to give those checkmarks to faith. People would be pouring over them as well - earning their paychecks, making their names....9-5.

What the evidence suggests to us is that our reality isn't all there is.....that perhaps effects in our reality can be caused outside of it. This something you would expect if God exists and maintains this world. MA basically said..."sorry bro....too fucking bad you weren't born before the discovery of quantum wierdness so you can make a prediction.....no prediction....no check mark". His position here doesn't follow. The evidence tells us the something. What it tells us is not dependent on a prior prediction.