RE: Testing a Hypothesis about the Supernatural
April 12, 2018 at 2:14 am
(This post was last modified: April 12, 2018 at 2:29 am by I_am_not_mafia.)
(April 11, 2018 at 7:03 pm)SteveII Wrote: Ah, the "no evidence" card. That's the card unthinking, unsophisticated, critically-thinking impaired atheists play. It is trivially easy to prove you wrong: Let's try an easy one related to the earlier post: Luke. Why is Luke not evidence?
I didn't even bother reading that religious crap at the end because I knew that you would use it as a distraction from the core of the argument that I was getting at and to avoid answering my questions. Which you are indeed attempting to do here. So predictable. The core argument you are trying to avoid is that you are making an arbitrary definition and applying it inconsistently. And pasting a dictionary definition multiple times in big bold letters doesn't change that.
To answer your question, just because something is written down in a book does not make it evidence. If it was, Harry Potter would be evidence of the supernatural.
Now answer my question which you are trying to ignore.
(April 11, 2018 at 1:19 pm)Mathilda Wrote: How is a supernatural cause different from a natural cause if both affect the nature that we can sense?