(September 30, 2014 at 11:26 am)Mister Agenda Wrote:(September 30, 2014 at 10:55 am)RobbyPants Wrote: I don't think the person making this argument realizes that it's not really helping him, either. I mean, yeah, absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence in and of itself, but we have to remember what's being discussed: a civilization wandering through the wilderness for forty years being fed daily by magic sky-food. Apart from the Bible's claims, there's no evidence for this, either.
It seems more reasonable to just assume it didn't happen until we find some other reason to believe it.
Archeaologists are more than capable of finding old campsites, if they're there to be found. Especially if more than a million people are traipsing around. It's nonsense to propose we wouldn't be able to find evidence of that. If we DID find evidence of that tomorrow, they'd change their tune in a heartbeat.
Show me a evidence of any 3400 year old camp site found in the open desert. Now just because we can not find evidences of a 3400 year old camp site in a desert, does it mean that people back then did not sleep outside of established structures? Or does it mean the organic material in the desert is consumed by sand blasting, heat and sun?
Truthfully, what would last from a campsite after 3400 years, in aplace that consumes whole cities made from stone with out a trace?
