(July 23, 2013 at 3:52 pm)Rationalman Wrote: That is not how the burden of proof works. This has doubtless been explained to you many times, but I will repeat it again. It is you that is making the positive claim that a god exists, we are simply reacting to that claim and saying we don't believe you. It is up to you to provide evidence for your claim, we don't have to provide evidence that you are wrong. Lets do an example: I say to you: 'I have a real living unicorn in my pocket, prove that I don't'. You see how ridiculous that is. You could claim anything is real if the only basis for believing in something is that you can't prove it doesn't exist.
And how many people "say" they have unicorns in their pockets besides you? 2? 1? No...the burden is on YOU to tell us, "THE MAJORITY" why there is no God!
(July 23, 2013 at 3:52 pm)Rationalman Wrote: There is plenty of evidence, reliable, valid, accurate, peer reviewed, published evidence. Just because you choose to ignore its existence does not mean it doesn't exist.
And you've experienced all these "answers" for yourself? And it's ALL TRUE? w/o a doubt in your mind? Let me enlighten you...Anything involving humans is suspect! ANYTHING!
(July 23, 2013 at 3:52 pm)Rationalman Wrote: 'Proven wrong' would be the wrong phrase. A better phrase would be 'corrected'. There are no absolute facts in science. We can be reasonable certain to a degree but science never claims total knowledge.
So your basis for believing that science is wrong, is that it has been wrong in the past? Have you not been wrong in the past about facts? But despite this, you still trust your own judgement?
Some haven't been "corrected"...just proven [wrong]!
So, there are no "absolute facts"...but the "fact" remains there is no God?
Brilliant! What was I thinking?
Quis ut Deus?
