You child like response deserves a child like example. How do you know fire burns? Can skin coming in contact with a flame burn it? Can setting an object on fire burn it? Yes is the correct answer, we know this because we can test it, we can observe it as it happens and see the end results afterwards. It doesn't mean it will always burn. For example if we move our hand over a flame quick enough, we might not even feel the flame. We also know some objects might burn and some objects never will. From that same fire, we can also observe that it gives off heat and light. With certain tools, we can make even more observations. We are presented with a body of facts that is then known as evidence. That evidence may support of a theory or hypothesis or it may show that the initial theory or hypothesis was wrong and therefore we have to come up with a new one.
I don't think you are really this dumb as to what evidence actually means but playing this silly little game does make you come off childish. I know you have a point to get across so lets just have it instead of running around in circles asking what something is when the answer is obvious. If you have a issue with some evidence or lack there of of something specific, instead of playing childish 'but' games, you should address the core point you're trying to get out.
I could add to the ridiculousness of your post by asking you "how do you know that my post you're reading right now isn't just in your head"? After all what evidence do you have that it's not in your head? Your last statement falls more in the lines of what is reality through consciousness. That's fine if you want to get into that but truly deserves it's own topic.
