1.6% of the North American population says that the Bible can’t be trusted in what it says. A couple even say that “evidence” actually turned them from Christianity. This of course is simply not possible. Either their claims of examining evidence are severely understated, or they’re simply lying.
Example: Determined to undermine the historical accuracy of the Bible, William M. Ramsay, a professor at Oxford studied archaeology with the aim of disproving the Bible. Once ready with the necessary scientific tools and learning, he travelled to Palestine and focussed on the book of Acts, which he fully expected to refute as nothing more than myth. After a quarter-century of work, Ramsay was awestruck by the accuracy of the book of Acts. In his quest to refute the Bible, Ramsay discovered fact after fact after fact which confirmed Its accuracy. He had to concede that Luke's account of the events and setting recorded in the narrative were exact even in the smallest detail. As an example see: http://makarios-makarios.blogspot.com/2009/08/can-you-trust-luke.html
Far from attacking the biblical account, Ramsay produced a book, "St. Paul, the Traveller and Roman Citizen," which supported it. Eventually, William Ramsay shook the intellectual world by writing that he had converted to Christianity.
Ironically, this man who set out to refute the Bible, found himself accepting the Bible as God's Word because of his explorations and discoveries. For his contribution to Biblical knowledge with his many books, he was knighted also.
Despite numerous examples of this type, this 1.6% of the population maintains their implausible position, not because of the evidence but in spite of the evidence. They must do this or their world-view will collapse.
It's what these people are like. It's how they think.