Unverifiable Claims Quotes

Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel.

So much about Trump is... mysterious and slippery. Everything in his business record, you had to ask him for the details. He made himself the only source. He would either not tell you, or he was often an unreliable narrator about his own life.

People are always demanding proof. These are things that are not easily proved.

Truth disappears with the telling of it.

I found it peculiar that those who wanted to take military action could — with 100 per cent certainty — know that the weapons existed and turn out to have zero knowledge of where they were.

We cannot, of course, disprove God, just as we can't disprove Thor, fairies, leprechauns, and the Flying Spaghetti Monster. But, like those other fantasies that we can't disprove, we can say that God is very, very improbable.

Does it mean, if you don't understand something, and the community of physicists don't understand it, that means God did it? Is that how you want to play this game? Because if it is, here's a list of things in the past that the physicists at the time didn't understand [and now we do understand] [...]. If that's how you want to invoke your evidence for God, then God is an ever-receding pocket of scientific ignorance that's getting smaller and smaller and smaller as time moves on - so just be ready for that to happen, if that's how you want to come at the problem

As long as every question is answered by the word “God,” scientific inquiry is simply impossible.

In fact men will fight for a superstition quite as quickly as for a living truth - often more so, since a superstition is so intangible you cannot get at it to refute it, but truth is a point of view, and so is changeable.

My sources are unreliable but their information is fascinating

Whatever lies beyond the limits of experience, and claims another origin than that of induction and deduction from established data, is illegitimate.

Despite the best efforts of apologists like William Lane Craig, the 'evidence' for Christianity's truth is, in truth, not the kind that science will or should ever admit. We believers mean something different by the word: something that puts faith permanently in the category of irreproducible results.

I do not know whether any of this is true. I am certain that the scientific community does not know that it is false.

We cannot, of course, disprove God, just as we can't disprove Thor, fairies, leprechauns and the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

The trouble with half-truths is you never know which half you've got.

Is it not possible that we are still living in the Dark Ages, still mocking the suggestion of 'mystical' forces that we cannot see or comprehend.

The current fad in economic forecasting is to project so far into the future that no one will be around to hold you accountable.

The peculiarity of all death-based religions is that their subject-matter is entirely outside of facts. Men could think and think, talk and argue, advance, deny, assert, and controversy, and write innumerable books, without being hampered at any time by any fact.

Creating fake facts does require a measure of haphazard research, insofar as they need to not just be possible, but also interesting.

There is no lie that a man will not believe; and there is no man who does not believe many lies; and there is no man who believes only lies.

The point is, how do you know the Guarantee Fairy isn't a crazy glue sniffer.

There's no credibility in anonymous sources.

Both economics and politics are false sciences.

A writer may tell me that he thinks man will ultimately become an ostrich. I cannot properly contradict him.

Nine times out of ten, in the arts as in life, there is actually no truth to be discovered; there is only error to be exposed.