What you call "false evidence" has worked very well for many very wise people over the last two or three millennia - but not as "evidence." All "that biblical stuff, all that witness, all those edicts of holy men and all that tradition" is the context of one belief system - within which one can explore "what is within and what is beyond" and view it all as sacred.

No it hasn't worked very well. It's given us a world full of religion in which billions of people are being led by the nose along a very false trail. The fact that you can't see that you don't need those things to be absolutely, profoundly and satisfyingly one hundred percent as happy as you are now, and with a freed intellect and imagination and sense of enquiry to boot, indicates that you've been taken in, hook, line and sinker, along with billions of others.

Now, the "evidence" and "proof" are essential tools when we explore on a scientific level, which is also a valid and necessary level of exploration - but not the only level. When you explore the essence of things and what is beyond all things, poetry and myth and ritual and tradition are the essential tools.

Well, there's nothing wrong with myth as long as you are fully aware that there is not a scrap of truth in it. The trouble comes when myth is sold as truth, which is a very widespread practice. Indeed, a central tenet in most major religions, I should think. As for ritual and tradition, well it's ritual and tradition in some mainstream religions to sexually mutilate small children. I wonder if you have a list of unacceptable versus acceptable traditions, based on slightly more than the accident of your place of birth. One other thing, for the hundredth time. Proof is not a word used in proper science.