Do Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence?

[Foxaèr]

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.

The purpose of a fallacy is to separate ingenuous opinion from logical truth.

I agree that people become lost in the fallacy battle, but stating that there is no evidence for god's existence is logical truth.

The claim, no matter what it is, has to be followed up with the proper evidence in order for it to transfer from claim to fact. Religious claims remain claims because there is no proper evidence to classify them as factual.