[SmartCitizen:] Don't you get it? Only the evidence counts. Nothing else.
[Ichneumon:] Okay, then what *does* the evidence say?
[SmartCitizen:] That depends upon the subjective observer (and there is no other type),
And the wheel goes round and round... Shall we dance?
Anyway, this is looking suspiciously like, "it doesn't matter how much evidence there is, I reserve the right to ignore it all because trying to deduce anything from it would just be pointlessly subjective anyway..."
and the quality of the evidence.
And who gets to (subjectively?) decide *that*? (and/or dismiss it...)
Look, do you actually want to learn anything from the evidence, or are you just making your excuses?
Either he's gone, or we are in for a real treat.
I take it the last sentence in your post 279 is a rhetorical question.
The point is that there is no such thing as an objective observer. The observer can never be sure that his observation corresponds to objective reality. It's a real philosophical problem that no one has been able to solve. Logical positivism was the latest attempt - it was thoroughly refuted and discredited.
If you have solved it, then please enlighten us all because all of the great thinkers in history have failed.