No reason justifies disbelief.

[Abaddon_ire]

I'm not particularly interested in revelations. I'm focussing more on what we mean when we talk about reliability. 

Except that you are.

We have countless "revealed facts" which turned out to be BS and none which turned out to be correct.

What a puerile argument. Take the number of failed "end-of-the-world" revelations that have passed without incident. Gonna brush those all under the rug?

Do we have countless "revealed facts"? I don't think we do,

Google it. Is that beyond you? Yup.

because all those things which were interpreted as revealed facts failed. Which means they were illusions.

So you admit there is no means to tell the reliable from the false.

Does this mean that ALL revealed facts are illusions? Maybe.

No it means "revealed facts are fundamentally unreliable.

But in the desert people often see mirages where there's no water, and this doesn't mean that no oases exist. 

What a dumb assertion. A moments thought would reveal to you why it is an utterly bovine assertion, but you are not even capable of that.

False positives abound. But this doesn't rule out the existence of real revelation. 

There are none. That rules it out. Disagree? Present one true revealed fact.

I don't believe in real revelation,

Yes, you do.

but we have to be careful in our logic.

Logic is unnecessary to dismiss abject nonsense.

Don't people say that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, or something like that?

Nope. One man stated that. everyone else is just quoting him because it is so true. That you are ignorant of the origin of that quote lends further weight to my conclusion about what you are about. You cannot credibly claim to be ignorant of such a statement.

Frankly, you are deploying every method you have been indoctrinated with to try and drag everyone down to your stupid level. Go fish.