“You lack a grasp of logic and don’t even understand what you yourself are saying, Harley.
You’re claiming not having proof of something somehow positively supports what you have no proof of. That’s absolutely idiotic. If you are a believer in something, the burden of proof is upon YOU, not those who don’t share your belief. You must demonstrate the validity of what you are proposing. It is simple logic!
Science indicates what there is proof of and doubts what there is no proof of. It refines or restates matters as evidence is either further validated, invalidated or unavailable. Science doesn’t ‘believe’. It tests. It verifies. It postulates and extrapolates based upon existing knowledge and then seeks to prove it or disprove it.
There is no proof of what you most likely appear to believe in. If there were, it would be fact and demonstrable by science and supported by repeatable, verifiable evidence. This is how reality works, Harley.
I’ll repeat: Not knowing something does not support in any way the existence of it AT ALL or discredit those who do not believe in it. What there is no evidence of, most probably doesn’t exist.
I know there is no evidence of unicorns. It is therefore reasonable to say there are no unicorns. It doesn’t matter whether I don’t ‘know’ if there are unicorns or not if there simply is no evidence of unicorns.”
*lesigh* I really don’t even care how the person replies. The limits of their IQ has already been demonstrated.
When does stupid season start? (ala duck/rabbit season)