Getting back to gemli, here is a response to him:
gemli: "But there's a book written by the Moonmen! It tells an extraordinary tale that can't be verified, but, uh, well, um, I believe it! And so do lots of other people who coincidentally spread out from one isolated community. They spread the word, and now there are Moonmens all over the world! Surely that means the story is true!"
Nobody here makes an argument that is even remotely analogous to your caricature. I'm unaware, in fact, of anybody anywhere who makes such an argument.
Hmm. Arguing one is 'unaware' really doesn't help, does it?
gemli: "Even though the Marsmen believe in an entirely different story, along with scores of other this-men or that-men claims, it means that when lots of people believe different absurd tales it makes all of them credible!"
Nor is this recognizable.
No, it's not to a mopologist, because DCP's version is that
only his story is credible.
gemli: "And don't ask for "proof." No only is it insulting, it's indicative of a closed mind that refuses to accept stories that are built on circular evidence."
If I've offered a "circular argument" at any point, you should demonstrate that. I deny having ever done so.
Oh my. Every time a mopologist starts by saying 'i start by assuming my religious claims are true,' (like Muhlestein, DCP, etc.,) they are making a circular argument. This is DCP being incredibly facetious.