True, but said evidence is not actually evidence in the scientific sense. It's more that said people tend to not understand science on a scarily fundamental level.
Well, some of them may know it's not science but don't consider science the best/only way to know things. ie a personal experience with God is not scientifically verifiable or repeatable, but most people would consider it strong evidence in a broad not-scientific sense.
Which is different from people who claim to have evidence in the scientific sense when they don't, they are annoying. I think it indicates an unwillingness to be honest and say "The scientific evidence is currently against us but we don't care because we know we're right, and will be vindicated one day". Every time I read creationist "logic" I want to hit something :/
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Well, some of them may know it's not science but don't consider science the best/only way to know things. ie a personal experience with God is not scientifically verifiable or repeatable, but most people would consider it strong evidence in a broad not-scientific sense.
Which is different from people who claim to have evidence in the scientific sense when they don't, they are annoying. I think it indicates an unwillingness to be honest and say "The scientific evidence is currently against us but we don't care because we know we're right, and will be vindicated one day". Every time I read creationist "logic" I want to hit something :/