Problematic Theology Made REALLY Simple

Let's say I tell you that I own a Davy Crockett style coonskin cap.  Now let's say that first off you think that "coonskin cap" sounds vaguely racist even when a Wikipedia link is included showing it's not and secondly that you are skeptical and do not think it's possible that I can own one.  How should I respond to you?

The best possible answer I could give would be:

See?  Argument settled, it's right there for all the world to see.  Still skeptical?  Feel free to come over, I'll show it to you in person and maybe even let you touch the soft fluffy hide.  Just wash your hands first.  Still don't believe me?  Really?  How could you not?  You're just being contrarian on purpose now, aren't you?  Psh, I can't talk to you when you get like this!

On the other hand...

The worst possible answer I could give would be:

Really?  How is that even an argument?  Sure if I said "You don't know everything there is to know in the universe so it's totally possible that I'm right and you're wrong" I would probably technically correct in a way but that's a terrible answer to a simple question.  Similarly if I told you to just believe that I have a hat and that if you presuppose that it is true you will feel the proof of my coonskin cap ownership in your heart - that wouldn't be very convincing either now would it?  No, I'm pretty sure that would sound insane.  Even worse, I could say that I don't need to give you proof, the fact that I told you about it is all the proof you need and if you don't believe me then just wait until you're dead because then you will have all the proof you want.  If I said that and you punched me in the face, no one would blame you because that is such a bad argument that it actually goes full circle and becomes the opposite of an argument.

Only thing left to add is that I look uber manly in a coonskin hat.  Don't even bother trying to refute that argument, you're just going to end up looking stupid.