Re: What is SCIENCE?

"Dan Still" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Christopher A. Lee wrote...
> >
> > Except of course that there isn't any evidence at all - if there had
> > been, people like you would have taken great pleasure in rubbing our
> > faces in it.
>
> You know, you say I'm begging the question.  But in this discussion,
> you have put forth no evidence that shows the lack of god(s).  Yet you
> make the bold claim that "there isn't any evidence at all" for god(s).

There can be no evidence that a god does not exist.  What would such
evidence be?  There can, however, be evidence that a god does exist.  Since
such evidence has been claimed, but never presented, we can certainly
conclude that there is no evidence that a god exists.

[snip]

> You assume that my view has to be proven and yours does not.  That is
> a wrong assumption.  Neither view is more correct than the other,
> before the discussion.  If some martian landed on earth and knew
> nothing about this debate, he/she/it would have to hear both sides
> before making up his/her/its mind.  That's how this should be
> approached.

We assume it because it's the case.  Your view is "God exists."  Ours is
"Show me the evidence and I'll believe you.  Until then, I doubt you claim
as I doubt all unlikely and unsubstantiated claims."

So, show me the evidence.  I have none to show you, and I need none.  I'm
making no claim, just investigating yours.

Enkidu