Do Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence?

[Whateverist]

OP's ?: Do Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence?

A: Only if you want others to take it seriously. For your own amusement, have it your way.

---

I wouldn't go using the words "blind spot" considering the age of the book of mythology you defend.

Actually, claiming that something is false because it is old, or better because it is new; is a fallacy.

To exclaim "Oh, yeah right - not likely"  isn't quite the same thing as claiming it is false.  In general, your shit is bullshit if you're talking about shit no one can see, touch or measure and you take no responsibility for establishing its bonafides.

[Brian37]

OP's ?: Do Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence?

A: Only if you want others to take it seriously.  For your own amusement, have it your way.

---

Actually, claiming that something is false because it is old, or better because it is new; is a fallacy.

To exclaim "Oh, yeah right - not likely"  isn't quite the same thing as claiming it is false.  In general, your shit is bullshit if you're talking about shit no one can see, touch or measure and you take no responsibility for establishing its bonafides.

I wish he had bonafides, like pork or beef that falls off the bonafides. But all I am getting are offerings of unicorn ribs.

[Jehanne]

Do Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence?

Steve,

We've discussed this before; do you believe in alien abductions:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_abduction

Dawn

[vorlon13]

We have evidence in Scripture of Jesus being crucified on Good Friday.

We also have evidence in Scripture of Jesus being crucified on Maundy Thursday.


So SteveII, do YOU have any extraordinary evidence Jesus was NOT crucified TWICE?????????

[RoadRunner79]

OP's ?: Do Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence?

A: Only if you want others to take it seriously. For your own amusement, have it your way.

---

Actually, claiming that something is false because it is old, or better because it is new; is a fallacy.

To exclaim "Oh, yeah right - not likely"  isn't quite the same thing as claiming it is false.  In general, your shit is bullshit if you're talking about shit no one can see, touch or measure and you take no responsibility for establishing its bonafides.

No that is the argument from incredulity. I was talking about the reasoning of because it's old which was in response to "considering the age of the book of mythology".

Now if you are not trying to make a case against the thing thing in question, but just commenting on your subjective mental state that is fine. And I agree, we shouldn't just accept everything without reason.... however if you are doing so for irrational and fallacious reasons, that doesn't make it bullshit.

[Jehanne]

We have evidence in Scripture of Jesus being crucified on Good Friday.

We also have evidence in Scripture of Jesus being crucified on Maundy Thursday.


So SteveII, do YOU have any extraordinary evidence Jesus was NOT crucified TWICE?????????

IX. As Peter spake thus with great sorrow of mind, many were added unto them that believed on the Lord. But the brethren besought Peter to join battle with Simon and not suffer him any longer to vex the people. And without delay Peter went quickly out of the synagogue (assembly) and went unto the house of Marcellus, where Simon lodged: and much people followed him. And when he came to the door, he called the porter and said to him: Go, say unto Simon: Peter because of whom thou fleddest out of Judaea waiteth for thee at the door. The porter answered and said to Peter: Sir, whether thou be Peter, I know not: but I have a command; for he had knowledge that yesterday thou didst enter into the city, and said unto me: Whether it be by day or by night, at whatsoever hour he cometh, say that I am not within. And Peter said to the young man: Thou hast well said in reporting that which he compelled thee to say. And Peter turned unto the people that followed him and said: Ye shall now see a great and marvellous wonder. And Peter seeing a great dog bound with a strong chain, went to him and loosed him, and when he was loosed the dog received a man's voice and said unto Peter: What dost thou bid me to do, thou servant of the unspeakable and living God? Peter said unto him: Go in and say unto Simon in the midst of his company: Peter saith unto thee, Come forth abroad, for thy sake am I come to Rome, thou wicked one and deceiver of simple souls. And immediately the dog ran and entered in, and rushed into the midst of them that were with Simon, and lifted up his forefeet and in a loud voice said: Thou Simon, Peter the servant of Christ who standeth at the door saith unto thee: Come forth abroad, for thy sake am I come to Rome, thou most wicked one and deceiver of simple souls. And when Simon heard it, and beheld the incredible sight, he lost the words wherewith he was deceiving them that stood by, and all of them were amazed.

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/te...peter.html

[Minimalist]

I wouldn't go using the words "blind spot" considering the age of the book of mythology you defend.

Actually, claiming that something is false because it is old, or better because it is new; is a fallacy.

So you, too, think that Apollo is real because Homer discusses him in an old book of myth?  Maybe you should sacrifice a goat.  Apollo likes that.  He may not shoot an arrow up your ass if you make a proper sacrifice.

Then again, you know those Greeks.

[Jehanne]

Actually, claiming that something is false because it is old, or better because it is new; is a fallacy.

So you, too, think that Apollo is real because Homer discusses him in an old book of myth?  Maybe you should sacrifice a goat.  Apollo like that.  He may not shoot an arrow up your ass if you make a proper sacrifice.

Then again, you know those Greeks.

Oh, oh...here's some more!

Jesus and sacred sex. In modern novels (The Da Vinci Code!) Jesus is said to have had a sexual relation with Mary Magdalene. Even stranger tales of Jesus, Mary, and sex were told in ancient Gospels; by all counts the strangest was The Greater Questions of Mary, now lost but quoted once by an early Church Father. According to this tale, Jesus took Mary alone up onto a mountain, and as she watched, he pulled a woman from his side and began to have sex with her. What happens next is even stranger, as it involves a case of divine coitus interruptus and the consumption of semen. Mary, not surprisingly, faints on the spot.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bart-d-ehr...05076.html

I think that we should move this one over to Area 69!

[Foxaèr]

Actually, claiming that something is false because it is old, or better because it is new; is a fallacy.

If anything, it is not false due to its age but rather due to its primitiveness; especially, during a time when some of us have intellectually surpassed the mentality of irrelevant mythologies.

[RoadRunner79]

Actually, claiming that something is false because it is old, or better because it is new; is a fallacy.

If anything, it is not false due to its age but rather due to its primitiveness; especially, during a time when some of us have intellectually surpassed the mentality of irrelevant mythologies.

Just because there is bad thinking, doesn't mean that it is false. It means it is a bad reason for the belief. I agree, there are a number of things that we are more knowledgeable about. And we have better access than ever before. However the key to most fallacies, is they ignore the reasons and evidence, and instead focus on something of no or little consequence. It doesn't follow, that because it is old, or because you believe the person is more primitive that they are incorrect and the new or more advanced is right. It is about the reasons for the claim. When the claim is made doesn't matter. Similar, would be some people, who think that older necessarily means better. We do live in a cost pinching, throw away society you know.

I would say that because it's old, or they where more primitive is more of an explanation, not a reason for the conclusion.