You give me NO logic, no arguement and no evidence.
Yes we have. It is logic that you do not accept, but that does not mean it is not logic. You insist that a simple analysis is adequate. We insist it is not.

You say you conducted a (random) experiment and have results after 100 trials and that proves your postualte? That is your evidence? You disregard logic based on chance? I can flip coins and come up heads that often in one hundered tosses... OR tails... THAT don't mean shit. What do you people not understand?

No, I make no such claim, nor have I ever. The purpose of the experiment is not to prove or disprove anything. It is to test your theory. That's what one does in the scientific world: build theories and test them. The purpose of the experiment is not to prove anything, but to reduce the chance one ends up with egg on your face because you forgot or misunderstood something when you built your theory.

I pick reality.
No you don't. You pick your belief but refuse to verfiy in any way at all. That's what I mean by the similarity to the fundamentalist threads.

So I repeat my question from the original post. Is there anything that would lead you to reconsider your stance?