To convince a non-believer

I think it's not for everyone to try to convince someone who believes in pseudo-science. It's possible, but not practical. Lets put some context: say you have a friend or a relative who saw a video explaining how science has proved the existence of a god x. Now of course, one choice is to gloss over the discussion and nod along. Another is to get offended and try to argue. Even a third recourse might be to engage in a meaningful discussion where you nudge the other to think critically and manage to reach the correct conclusion.

I propose that even the third option is not necessarily practical. Say there are 3 people A, B and C. C has created a complicated illusion through a lot of smoke and mirrors. Now B, believes this illusion to be true, each facet of it. Now of course, if A has to cancel that illusion, A must break apart, without mistake, each building block of C's creation. It's hard, but say A starts with one block, then the second and succeeds. By now A has spent a lot of effort trying to deconstruct these two blocks in a persuasive way particularly for B. As we all know, persuading someone on a logical topic is hardly easy. Something that is easy and obvious for one may not be for another.

So now in the tired state, it's likely that A can make a couple small mistakes. It's also just as likely that A is not an expert in some specific topics so that it's hard to deconstruct those ideas. A third roadblock is that deconstructing too many ideas becomes an ordeal for B so that they get either irritated or tired of the entire thing. At the end of this, the most likely outcomes are:

1. A makes a mistake and B uses that to escape the argument.

2. The argument becomes heated and no one is pulled in any direction.

3. The argument becomes tiring and both agree to disagree.

It's overall quite a useless endeavor, in my opinion. So, what's the recourse? I think there's two choices A has:

1. If not asked explicitly to opine, just unhear the topic and move on with life.

2. If asked explicitly, tell a polite short answer about what is A's position; if asked to elaborate, they can first be informed about the complexity of the situation and that there is only time to deconstruct one or two topics.

This gives a couple of advantages:

1. If B is indeed interested in A's arguments, either because they successfully got doubt or because they believe A, then they'll come back for more.

2. Both A and B will get the necessary time and space to carry forth the argument. A to formulate and B to ruminate.