Gretzky

So the very existence of a person depends on whether others believe he/she exist or not? 1 e$ H! V) V8 Y& B+ ^. ^9 ]
. ?0 M; X* Z$ H, e0 O5 Y) ^
Let's say someone (as reported in another post) actually saw Leslie Cheung in South America and claims the suicide was actually a hoax. Now some of us would believe this being true while others think this is nuts. But it's not up to us to decide whether he's dead or alive, right? If he's dead, he's dead. If he's alive, he's alive. Our opinion has nothing to do with that truth.
  o5 I$ U- a( n5 x( Y( `+ B5 [. O& B4 E% y& E$ P/ |
The question here is: Does one's belief (determined by his experience) decide whether someone exist or not?
; O: y% a+ r! s7 ~# v# F1 F# @  K! d9 z0 H
My point here is: God can exist without us believing. A Supereme Being (whatever God/gods) DOES NOT NEED US to believe in order to prove his/her/their existence.
, I" l4 U8 _+ |0 z; j) p5 o3 A7 X3 W
I say this because the existential statement by Decarte "I believe, therefore I exist" is not a universal applicable statement (think about Terri Schivao, the brain-dead woman) and it has some fallacies.
! T& K& R* g7 u0 \% L. \* g1 v% }6 \
(Pls note: its logic here I'm after, not religion at all.)