David69
Angel Of The North
I've yet to see conclusive proof trump belief.
I doubt breaking the news to her would have any substantial effect.
But might just give her a heart attack
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
I've yet to see conclusive proof trump belief.
I doubt breaking the news to her would have any substantial effect.
But might just give her a heart attack
Well, then it wasn't proof, was it? It proved nothing to them.Doubtful. Proof is easily dismissed by those that truly believe.
Just look at all the people who don't "believe" in evolution despite the mountains of conclusive proof.
Well, then it wasn't proof, was it? It proved nothing to them.
Perhaps because there's no conclusive proof to be offered?I've yet to see conclusive proof trump belief.
I doubt breaking the news to her would have any substantial effect.
Perhaps because there's no conclusive proof to be offered?
"Conclusive enough" is a good deal more subjective than "conclusive."Meh, conclusive enough for many things. Point is, it doesn't matter how convincing your proof or evidence is - generally, if someone has a strong identification with belief in something, they'll dismiss any proof or evidence which counters it.
"Conclusive enough" is a good deal more subjective than "conclusive."
I think you do the religious a disservice. Sure there are those who will stick their fingers in their ears and shout "LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU," but it's been my experience that such folk are a tiny minority.
Fair enough.Guess we've had different experiences. Also, my comments are hardly limited to the religious.
Well, it doesn't negate it, as there is no such "proof objectively" beast. Proof is in the pudding.Right, it wasn't proof to them. Doesn't negate it as proof objectively.
Well, it doesn't negate it, as there is no such "proof objectively" beast. Proof is in the pudding.
To whom?Prove it.
To whom?
No can do. It wouldn't be proof, would it? Not even "proof to you."To me.
No can do. It wouldn't be proof, would it? Not even "proof to you."
No pudding, no proof.
Just pudding.So you have no proof of this assertion.
Just pudding.
To whom?Prove it.