Religion and Science are 1000% Opposite

[Little Rik]

Let us see your evidence that the supernatural is not natural so we know that you are not talking bull. 

So you're asking someone for evidence that something that by definition does not exist is not something else that does exist.

You need to learn what falsifiable means.

Wrong once again Mat.  

1) I am not the one who claimed that the supernatural is BS.
That means that I should NOT be asked for the contrary.
You got a big problem Mat (among all other problems of course)
You always try to reverse or shifts the burden of proof on other people.

That is not an honest way to proceed Mat.
That is 100% dishonesty.

Let us start from the beginning.
Let us start asking for evidence at the guy who said that the supernatural is BS.

2) Now let us talk about what is or is not falsifiable.

Here again you make a claim that the supernatural doesn't exist on the ground that it can not be testable (falsifiable argument)
Give evidence that the supernatural is not testable.

Possibly before Christmas.  

---

Well, well, well.
Here we got the expert in what is natural.

Let us see your evidence that the supernatural is not natural so we know that you are not talking bull. 

I know this is a waste of keyboard ink, but can you show some evidence that the supernatural actually exists?

Glad to see that you don't come up with the FALSIFIABLE BS story as Mat did.
I would be even more glad if you would have admitted that there is no evidence that the supernatural can not be testable because it can.

How?
By developing the awareness of who we are which is something that doesn't interest a bit materialists or atheists and also if the supernatural would be real then the whole atheist idea would collapse.
These are the reason why atheists deny the existence of the supernatural.