"But to say her OPINION is not correct is a little off. You don't know that and no one can prove her wrong. [ as long
as her statements remain within the realm of subjectivity ]"
The thing is, a religious belief seldom stays in the realm of subjectivity. Honestly, how many believers have told you that their religious views have no bearing on the actual nature of the world? I sure don't know any, and if they DID admit it, it would more or less invalidate said belief.
"As the DRAGON thing goes, the majority is what counts, and she would be ( quote,
unquote, proven wrong ) I agree with that. Still
doesn't mean there isn't a DRAGON there."
There ya go with that majority thing again. :) Yeah, a dragon could exist in her garage, potentially, though the chances are infinitesmally small so it, for the sake of argument, might as well not. All I'm trying to say is whether or not the dragon is actually there, her belief in the matter does not influence it one way or the other.
"However, you could say I was wrong due to the majorities acceptance of scientific
deduction that in fact, those keys WERE keys, and
I was a moron. But yes, in all facets I see what
Not the majority's acceptance of scientific belief. That would make scientific belief as prone to error as subjective belief, if the only thing seperating truth from fiction was the majority. The majority doesn't affect reality, only our perception of it, and again, those are entirely different things. Science does have a degree of subjectivity to it, but it consciously fights against it, so it has the best CHANCE of being consistently right.