Re: Evidence of God

Al Evan writes:

> That is my exact point: "No true atheist claims that there is no god."
> What's yours?

Then this would be the "no true Scotsman" fallacy.  If you say "there is a
God," then an atheist could either say "Nope, there ain't no God," or she
could say, "I don't believe you."  In the latter case either the onus would
be on you to do some smooth talking and trying to prove your claim, or you
could just ignore it altogether and pretend to put the onus back on her by
telling her she is an atheist (true, because she says she doesn't believe
you) and that the "true atheists" make the assertion that there is no god
(false, because you want to weasel out of your burden of proof.)  An atheist
could either say "There is no God," or "I don't believe you," but you would
have all atheists saying "There is no God."  Hence, the "no true Scotsman"
fallacy.

That is what these folks are trying to tell you.  There are two camps here;
one of them is saying "I don't believe you," (i.e. the Llama camp) and the
other is saying "there is no God, and I can back that up, but I don't feel
like doing that just right now, but please do get it straight what is an
atheist," (i.e. the Scamper camp.)

-- 
"If an opponent rebuts a claim of irrelevance, the other party must reply to
the opponent's rebuttal of the claim." -- J.F. Till