You can't have it both ways.
The argument "I can't see it, so it isn't there" is a rather silly argument. and is usually met with the response "You haven't seen (Name of thing) so, is that not real too."
It's usually a theist who has the second sentence here (A logical response too), usually that sentence is met with another response.
Unless it's a creationist.
The very same argument that probably annoys some theists, tends to be (ab)used by creationists.
"You've never seen evolution, so how can you know it's true?"
Of course they never seen the creation, so how can they know it's true?
AImboden wrote:
I'm not going to PM my agreement just because one tucan has pms.
»
- Ophios's blog
- Login to post comments
On the other hand, in what
On the other hand, in what sense can things be said to exist when we have no evidence for them? Maybe we can't see something, but we have to be able to at least deduce its existence from indirect evidence before I'll accept that it exists. To do less is to admit no distinction between fantasy and reality.
Lazy is a word we use when someone isn't doing what we want them to do.
- Dr. Joy Brown