On the nature of evidence.

[trmof]

I feel we've gone as far as we're going to without repeating ourselves. My larger point in posting this, beyond simply the simple nature of evidence in it's different forms, is to address our communal level of discourse by drawing attention to the fact, that lacking scientific data on either side, other people's experiences are just as valid to them as yours are to you. A failure to recognize this when debating any philosophical topic results in a failure to consider things seriously from the other person's point of view. If you wish to do this, that is fine, but it is both non-productive and has a tendency to perpetuate wars of words instead of spirited, friendly, enlightening debates, which is all anybody can hope for on this topic at the moment. I think this is a bad thing, and if you would like your conversations with other people to be more productive, you should try to be the kinder, more understanding person, as this is the only part of the conversation you have any control over. I would like to think I have done so to the best of my ability during these exchanges, even when bated.

---

I implied nothing

You wrote "it's already been fixed well enough for you. What more would constitute fixing it at this point?"

You presumed is was enough. Don't you even read your own posts?

And, yes, lacking evidence opinions are all worth very little. And you still don't understand what constitutes evidence.

and politely asked a followup question, which you ignored, and failed to answer the question while implying none was asked. You, sir, are a quisling.

I don't think that word means what you think it means, because it makes no sense in this context.

You appear more interested in venting your personal frustrations than discussing the topic outlined in a calm and rational manner. Please express your personal internal frustrations to someone else.

And I suggest you take your passive-aggressive crap elsewhere.

I am not passive-aggressive, while you have clearly moved from passive-aggression to openly aggressive-agressive during the course of your comments and have since resorted to outright name calling. Also you are correct, I misused the word quisling. I meant to call you an inadequate and inferior intellect. I'm glad we could clear that up. Please tell me if you know the actual Q word I was thinking of. Now please stop trying to bait me into an argument so you can feel good about being mean to someone you've never met for the rest of the day, as there is no other point in continuing the conversation. If you would like to sign off without using an insult I would be more than happy to let you have the last word. Otherwise, I'm going to keep pointing out how immature you're being, and you will presumably continue to prove me right until one of us gets bored and leaves.