Well, it could be the same evidence hasn't been presented to me as to you, or . . .
See, it is an individual matter of preception. It depends on the mind set. Some may be more open minded to the "evidence" than others.
. . . Some may be more gullible. Provide a two or three sentence outline of what you think the evidence is. And remember evidence isn't proof.
Alas! The topic list of the lines of evidence runs to 29 items. There's too much evidence to describe as simplistically as you'd like.
|
"... there are many reasons why you might not understand [an explanation of a scientific theory] ... Finally, there is this possibility: after I tell you something, you just can't believe it. You can't accept it. You don't like it. A little screen comes down and you don't listen anymore. I'm going to describe to you how Nature is - and if you don't like it, that's going to get in the way of your understanding it. It's a problem that [scientists] have learned to deal with: They've learned to realize that whether they like a theory or they don't like a theory is not the essential question. Rather, it is whether or not the theory gives predictions that agree with experiment. It is not a question of whether a theory is philosophically delightful, or easy to understand, or perfectly reasonable from the point of view of common sense. [A scientific theory] describes Nature as absurd from the point of view of common sense. And it agrees fully with experiment. So I hope you can accept Nature as She is - absurd. I'm going to have fun telling you about this absurdity, because I find it delightful. Please don't turn yourself off because you can't believe Nature is so strange. Just hear me all out, and I hope you'll be as delighted as I am when we're through. " - Richard P. Feynman (1918-1988), |