(January 14, 2016 at 3:41 pm)AAA Wrote:(January 14, 2016 at 3:21 pm)Stimbo Wrote: Hey - there's only room for one prophet around here! Work the other side of the street!Right, but what happens in instances where you eliminate every known hooved animal? You then have to start to think outside the box, and suppose it may be explained by something we have not yet seen. But yes, I agree we should turn known causes before we turn to things that we don't know can cause it.
In fact, I don't see any value in asking - let alone "demanding" - proof (or even evidence - learn the difference) for unfalsifiable things. I was just going to point out that positing a less-credible and unprovable explanation than rather more mundane yet plausible ones isn't a particularly tenable approach to discerning reality, that's all. Basically, when you hear hoofbeats, first eliminate horses (not literally, in a weird Equus kind of way) before concluding unicorns.
But if all known hooved animals are eliminated, the best answer does not then become, "must have been unicorns", by default. The best answer becomes "we don't know what made the hoofbeat noise, lets find out".
Appealing to the supernatural when you are out of natural answers, is argument from ignorance.
You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.