A question regarding proof

[ElDinero]

...and my argument goes to a very specific place.

So far it has gone nowhere because you refuse to take it anywhere.

Once again, is there a point to all of this?

Yes. Your evidence demand, far from being the kill shot you all think it is, is built on sand and you guys don't really believe it either.

Of course, every time I bring that point up, it instantly gets dismissed, yet never gets examined. So I figured I would show you, but looks like folks are not willing to engage.

Here's the beauty of it. If, like Rhythm says, you just let me "do my thing," my argument will either stand or fall of its own weight. But it doesn't seem like anyone's willing to take a chance on that because we've swiftly moved to these feeble efforts to dismiss it before letting it play out.

Seems like a pretty cowardly move to me, coming from a crowd that crows so much about how reason and evidence should carry the day, but that shit appears to be nothing but slogans for most.

The true free-thinker would be engaging this, not seeking to muddy the waters. Looks like Rhythm's invitation to join him for waffles was a well-accepted one.

---

Oh great, we've got another one who claims they've already provided the evidence but won't show us where, and it's our fault for not looking for it. Bore off, will you?

Heh. I didn't say I provided the evidence. I said I provided the point. I'd be happy to continue providing the evidence, but something funny happened on the way and the choir is now singing for its supper.

But again, just so you can keep up, the evidence demand is broken and if pressed, you guys will happily show that you don't even believe it yourselves. Rhythm got closest to admitting it, but he was smart enough to see where it was going and so he shifted gears into obfuscatory mode before the real hell broke loose.

And he was successful, too, because I've run out of time. I'll try and pick it up again tomorrow, but that will probably just lead to more of this so score another victory for reason and logic as the beacons that so obviously light the way around here.

Science goes where the evidence leads, but that doesn't mean anyone has to follow if it bumps up against their cherished beliefs. Faith is strong stuff.

Yawn!

Is it any wonder you run out of time when you spend your time crafting posts like the above? Your claim that someone else is obfuscating the matter is hilarious.

Maybe if you spent a little more time telling us what your point is and a little less time telling us that we're taking things on faith etc etc, we might get somewhere. Now, I'm the sort of guy who doesn't like to have my time wasted, you'll hopefully have noticed that my replies in this thread have been fairly terse and to the point. When I used a term that I shouldn't have, I clarified. I have then asked you what your point is at least once.

The way I work in threads here is I ask somebody their point. If they do what you're doing and evade the issue and level accusations at me and other posters, I get the feeling I'm having my time wasted. So what I do then is I set out a few questions and ask them to answer directly so that we can get the ball rolling again. If they continue to use flowery language and be evasive, I then know I'm having my time wasted, and I let that person waste other people's time and I go to another thread. I'm really not patient enough for your bullshit. With that in mind:

1. We have established that you cannot prove that you had a dream about something. So what?
2. If you are trying to prove that we believe in things without evidence, like what? Bearing in mind that we have already clarified our position on your god damn dream pony.
3. What is the overall point that you are trying to make?

Best of luck.