Quote:"the idea" that ideas have to be scientifically and empirically confirmed in order for them to be valid? Or is this an idea you are not willing to give up if challenged?
There is a difference between things we accept without evidence in daily life, for example, I have a reasonable expectation that my house will still be in tact when I get home. I have a reasonable expectation that my cat will still be alive when I get home, he is young enough and strictly an indoor cat. And then there are outrageous claims like Big Foot, Area 51 UFO crap, perpetual motion machines, phone psychics and god/s deities/super natural.
I don't assume that my house wont suffer damage ever, I do live in hurricane territory, I don't assume my cat will live forever, but my house exists and my cat exists. Those other claims are not provable and are merely the conspiracy pet whims of those who support them.
If my house got damaged by a fallen tree or hit by lightening, I wouldn't keep my prior expectation that it is ok, when new data comes in, I change. When my cat gets older my expectations will change because when any pet or human gets old their health becomes an issue.
The other claims I mentioned don't start in anything provable, other than humans have vivid imaginations.
