Truth? What do You Think?

A skeptical Blogger insists he's on to something important so I decided to link to what he wrote. It's long. I have my doubts. It seems he wants to develop a rational step by step approach to reasoning with a believer. In my experience this has not worked. Believers switch topics once we corner them. In some ways that's legitimate to do because they have Bayesian background beliefs that are not presently on the table but form the background for why they think the present one on the table is more probable than not. In my experience it takes a slam dunk cumulative case dealing with all of the background beliefs that one can write about in a single readable book that refers to other tomes defending each claim.