(October 2, 2013 at 5:23 pm)Rational AKD Wrote:(October 2, 2013 at 5:05 pm)Brian37 Wrote: Point being you are shifting the burden of proof. You can make whatever naked assertion you want, but I am not going to swallow it simply because you can string words together.
why don't you argue with what I say rather than making it up committing straw man fallacy. I never said once believe in God because there's no evidence to the contrary. I said if you believe there is no God, you must have evidence to substantiate it. saying "there's no evidence for God, so there is no God" is not adequate.
Which god? Or, rather, which version of which god? A multi-self refuting one, or one neither you nor I have conceived of yet?