This started over what seemed to be a fairly straighforward, logical question. Given that both dogma and observeration may be either true or false, how do we test them to make that determination?
Testing observations doesn't seem to be particularly problematic - we do it all the time.
Testing dogma seems to be a different proposition altogether. So much so that the original comparison seems to be of little no practical consequence.
Or both.
Observation is obvious to the observer.. but to an observer with a different vista.. another observation may seem strange or even in error.. i.e. the Observer problem..
Whos correct?, or even more correct?, or has blind spots?..
All three could be possible with all observers(us)..