Do you have unchangeable evidence to support your allegation or premises? If so demonstrate it that I may be enlightened!

Since you made a definitive statement, I'd like to see your evidence that there is only one question needs to be asked, and that your question happens to be that one question.

I've already achieved enlightenment, so feel free to skip that part.

The problem is my parents would define "unchangeable evidence" as "The Prophet said so."

Look at the government. You can't pin anything down anymore because everyone is playing fast and loose with word definitions. I wish there was a law that you had to go by Webster's. Of course, then some rich person would buy Webster's and accept "donations"-- wink wink-- for the service of changing definitions to suit their purposes. Its all over. We can't win anymore.

Remember when everybody just lied? So yesterday. Misspoke is where it's at nowadays.

I would say "externally verifiable" instead of "unchangeable" in your question.

Science is always clarifying, and the evidence is available for anyone who wants to put in the brain-work to learn about it. You should be able to independently replicate and examine the data that supports the claim. You might even be able to add to the body of knowledge which is refined to incorporate EVERY piece of evidence or the hypothesis is discarded.

Examples of things that do not qualify as "externally verifiable" are:

Authority opinions
Hearsay
Faith
Emotion-based "facts"

dagny Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Examples of things that do not qualify as
> "externally verifiable" are:
>
> Authority opinions
> Hearsay
> Faith
> Emotion-based "facts"

...to which I'd add:

Anecdotal stories/claims

I would ask: "So, what was your favorite translation method of choice: A smooth, technicolor rock, complete with a swell looking hat, or 200 lbs worth of gold?

Does this statement comply with the latest position, or is it based on a previously held notion?

I always reply with, "and you know this how?"

Their response tells me whether or not continuing to converse on
the topic is likely to be productive.

The only definitive statement for a TBM is "The church is true."


I was thinking about this today while picking fruit (don't ask): when presented with any one of the numerous slam dunk reasons TSCC is bogus, a TBM automatically twists, bends and obfuscates because the only "definitive statement" is "The church is true."

My son told me that Satan was Jesus's brother.

My question:

"Who told you that, and why do you believe them?"