Probably the only time I’ll humour you for this since people can’t be bothered to research. The lack of critical thinking is simply too painful.
TLDR: If you don’t want to believe, anything that is shown will be claimed to be fake. So what is the purpose?
================================================================================
< Parable of the Constant Gardener >
John Frame, theologian, Christian philosopher, counter to Anthony Flew
Once upon a time two explorers came upon a clearing in the jungle.
A man was there, pulling weeds, applying fertiliser, trimming branches. The man turned to the explorers and introduced himself as the royal gardener. One explorer shook his hand and exchanged pleasantries.
The other ignored the gardener and turned away: “There can be no gardener in this part of the jungle,” he said; “this must be some trick.”
They pitch camp. Every day the gardener arrives, tends the plot. Soon the plot is bursting with perfectly arranged blooms.
“He’s only doing it because we’re here—to fool us into thinking this is a royal garden.”
The gardener takes them to a royal palace, introduces the explorers to a score of officials who verify the gardener’s status.
Then the skeptic tries a last resort: “Our senses are deceiving us. There is no gardener, no blooms, no palace, no officials. It’s still a hoax!”
Finally the believer despairs: “But what remains of your original assertion? Just how does this mirage, as you call it, differ from a real gardener?”
================================================================================