The funny thing about evidence, is that there is evidence for everything and even contradictory things. That is where experience comes in. Faith makes that leap, even a small leap at times, between EVIDENCE, as is commonly thrown around, and the acceptance of that EVIDENCE as foundational truth.
For example, there is even evidence that contradicts my evidence of my experiential profession. The more we deal with EVIDENCE, we begin to understand the notion of selective evidence, projection, and relational levels of the macro verses the micro, ie relativity; and how it can cause apparent contradictions with other established evidence.
There is more to the universe and the psyche than Thinking and Sensation (the later being a personality orientation that places much more value on knowledge gained from the five senses and tends to see the world as very literal). There is also Feeling and Intuition. One can't understand properly Intuition using Thinking, for example, since you are translating Intuition into Thinking terms, just as how one can't understand a Thinking mode in terms of Feeling, you lose a lot in the translation.
Fact remains that the nature of Ego-consciousness can only see part of the whole at a time as it is too busy scrutinizing the part of the whole as its focus of attention, and we thus fall into that trap of confusing the part with the whole as the Ego is very adept at pulling the wool over its own eyes in its shortsightedness. We even see this when one takes a phrase from a text and removes it form its bed of context. An example that comes to mind was from a discussion I was having with a creationist who would not believe in/accept evolution, and among her collected "evidence" she threw at me, she gives me a quote from Darwin -
"Charles Darwin himself admitted: 'To suppose that the eye could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree.' "
Apparently fundies, they are called on this site, like to use that Darwinian quote a lot. She saw this as evidence that Darwin didn't believe evolution outright, and contradicted himself. She didn't bother verifying the surrounding phrasing herself, because if she did, she would have noticed the following -
"Yet reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a perfect and complex eye to one very imperfect and simple, each grade being useful to its possessor, can be shown to exist; if further, the eye does vary ever so slightly, and the variations be inherited, which is certainly the case; and if any variation or modification in the organ be ever useful to an animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, can hardly be considered real."
Again, an example of the danger of selective evidence. This woman may have perhaps been more of a Feeler than a Thinker, going about with a relating attitude than a discriminating attitude. However it was a natural, albeit naive mistake due to the inherent limited and narrowly fixed scope of the Ego's focus of attention.
Lastly, you had said, "yay, you accuse US of painting all Christians with the same brush while painting US with a broad brush." What's the matter, don't like your tool of science turned against you? I never accused you of anything, you put words in my mouth in a stroke of projection. Maybe you do paint all Christians with the same brush, maybe not, I don't know, and I certainly have not the time to go chasing after all you have previously posted. And I said nothing more than a generalization based on professional analytical experience and what has previously been shown through empirical evidence (there's that word again, evidence) and overall common-denominator links.
Science and the scientific method came from Aristotle, a Greek philosopher, and philosophy being born from the Ego and its partial scope of thinking, and by default has a limited world-view or Weltanschauung. I'm not discounting the scientific method but experience shows, my experience at least, that we encounter several times a day decisions we make as well as the effects of the decisions of others that are more or less spontaneous, not calculated, and not brought about by scientific methodology. After all, the Universe didn't need the scientific method or science in general to exist, these are human creations.
