> You can make persuasive arguments about non-falsifiable points. You actually can't. Like, you can make _arguments_ based on non-falsifiable points. But if t

> You can make persuasive arguments about non-falsifiable points. You actually can't. Like, you can make _arguments_ based on non-falsifiable points. But if the points aren't falsifiable, then there's nowhere for the discussion to go. How can I respond to them? What can I do to counter your arguments? Nothing. It's dull.