Hi Robert,

I read everything you wrote. I'll keep my reply focused and specific.

You seem to think that invoking “special pleading” settles the matter. It doesn’t. It’s not special pleading to say that not all truth claims are subject to laboratory verification. That’s simply recognizing different domains of inquiry.

Historical claims aren’t repeatable in a lab, but we still evaluate them.

Philosophical reasoning isn’t scientific, but it undergirds all science.

Mathematical truths aren't based on physical experimentation.

Love, morality, logic, meaning—none of these are physical or scientifically “provable.”

And yet, they’re real. We reason about them. We live by them.

Demanding scientific evidence for something outside the scope of the scientific method is like demanding a microscope prove that justice exists. It’s a category error—not special pleading.

Also: yes, people are influenced by upbringing. That’s true for every worldview. That’s why we evaluate claims on their merit, not just their origin.

You’ve made it clear that you don’t find any theistic argument compelling—and that’s your right.

Wishing you the best,

Brian