Why would that be the case?
Because if no one else can check it, how do you know your own personal biases haven't lead you to a flawed and incorrect conclusion?
No, that would only introduce their biases. Sorry you cannot understand this.
This is a core part of the scientific method. Having people check your work to make sure you haven't made any mistakes is a very good idea.
And stop with your patronizing, "I'm sorry you can't understand this" attitude. The entire scientific community says you are wrong.
What is Peer Review? | Wiley
So a person should change their belief that they have determined is true just so they won't be mired? Where would that lead, changing beliefs as the seasons change?
You tell me. You are the one who claimed that me holding the position of atheist since I deconverted from Christianity had left me mired.
They can claim whatever they want but they don't have what Baha'u'llah has to back up their claims.
And they all say that their prophet of choice has stuff that your Mr B doesn't have.
You once again fail to realise that your faith isn't anything special.
It is not a what if for me, it is a what if for you and other nonbelievers.
Oh, please don't tell me you are resorting to Pascal's Wager. that's a really weak argument.
I guess you did not look very far.
People of all religions claim that their holy person of choice has done the things to back up their position, but no one else has. Once again, your belief is nothing special.
That certainly is a choice you can make.
It also has the benefit of fitting all the evidence.