LogicalAtheist
...Now.
We have looked at how unlikely a given written claim is in and of itself.
We have established that the burden of proof lies on the claim that such an event or object occurs or exists.
But. It still is good and fine to have not only the opposiing side waiting for this outrageous claim to have some proof, but to also take some time while waiting and find proven claims which contradict, and therefore disprove (to the satisfactory level of science) the claim we're waiting for proof of.
There's one thing that's important here. I don't mean to sound rude by saying that this is something most people mistake, and overlook.
The importance is that this claim of a god with the properties is INDEPENDANT. A given obbject is this item (God) if and ONLY IF it meets every requirement defining it.
Thus, if one defining parameter of it is proven to not be possible (through any of the many ways) it is considered not to exist.
NOTE: Science scrutinizes science, sure mistakes can be made. We need to care only about the here and now.
Let's leave it at that, you comment and when ready we'll do as said above and attack the paramaters.
I mean, we've been waiting for x thousands of years for the other side, we might as well have a go eh?
We have looked at how unlikely a given written claim is in and of itself.
We have established that the burden of proof lies on the claim that such an event or object occurs or exists.
But. It still is good and fine to have not only the opposiing side waiting for this outrageous claim to have some proof, but to also take some time while waiting and find proven claims which contradict, and therefore disprove (to the satisfactory level of science) the claim we're waiting for proof of.
There's one thing that's important here. I don't mean to sound rude by saying that this is something most people mistake, and overlook.
The importance is that this claim of a god with the properties is INDEPENDANT. A given obbject is this item (God) if and ONLY IF it meets every requirement defining it.
Thus, if one defining parameter of it is proven to not be possible (through any of the many ways) it is considered not to exist.
NOTE: Science scrutinizes science, sure mistakes can be made. We need to care only about the here and now.
Let's leave it at that, you comment and when ready we'll do as said above and attack the paramaters.
I mean, we've been waiting for x thousands of years for the other side, we might as well have a go eh?