(October 17, 2013 at 12:17 am)Godschild Wrote:(October 16, 2013 at 11:22 pm)Stimbo Wrote: Except I'm not talking about burden of proof, I'm referring to the total dismissal of the other person's position by forestalling whatever proof may be available. Doesn't matter if that proof, or evidence, isn't what it's claimed to be, or falls short of doing what's claimed to be on the tin; simply shooting it down as nonexistent before it's even been presented is hardly conducive to a reasonable discussion - the bread and butter of a discussion forum.
Who is forestalling anything, DP made an addition to the scriptures that has absolutely no support at all, until he brings that support then his supposition's dismissal needs no action on our part other than to discount it.
GC
You are forestalling. You didn't wait for DP to bring the support for his claim, you didn't even ask him if he could support it. You said "First of all you can't prove that it's not history." That's not asking for evidentiary support; that's forestalling.
At the age of five, Skagra decided emphatically that God did not exist. This revelation tends to make most people in the universe who have it react in one of two ways - with relief or with despair. Only Skagra responded to it by thinking, 'Wait a second. That means there's a situation vacant.'
