On 2/17/2014 8:07 PM, Tim wrote:

When science *CAN* prove there *IS NOT* a Divine Creator- I'll believe that science.

I don't want to pick on you but it's a good example.

The burden of proof is on the one making the positive claim, not those
who doubt the claim due to lack of evidence.

If I claim there is an invisible pink unicorn in my garage that directs
the universe and farts rainbows I hope you wouldn't just believe it.

On Wed, 19 Feb 2014 08:43:47 -0800, thumper wrote:

On 2/17/2014 8:07 PM, Tim wrote:

When science *CAN* prove there *IS NOT* a Divine Creator- I'll believe that science.

I don't want to pick on you but it's a good example.

The burden of proof is on the one making the positive claim, not those
who doubt the claim due to lack of evidence.

If I claim there is an invisible pink unicorn in my garage that directs
the universe and farts rainbows I hope you wouldn't just believe it.

Perhaps he should have said , "When science *can* prove the big bang theory, I'll believe that
science!"

On 2/19/14, 11:43 AM, thumper wrote:
On 2/17/2014 8:07 PM, Tim wrote:

When science *CAN* prove there *IS NOT* a Divine Creator- I'll believe
that science.

I don't want to pick on you but it's a good example.

The burden of proof is on the one making the positive claim, not those
who doubt the claim due to lack of evidence.

If I claim there is an invisible pink unicorn in my garage that directs
the universe and farts rainbows I hope you wouldn't just believe it.


Wait, I bought my unicorn on eBay and was told it was the only one. I
took that on faith, too.

On 2/19/2014 11:43 AM, thumper wrote:
On 2/17/2014 8:07 PM, Tim wrote:

When science *CAN* prove there *IS NOT* a Divine Creator- I'll believe
that science.

I don't want to pick on you but it's a good example.

The burden of proof is on the one making the positive claim, not those
who doubt the claim due to lack of evidence.

If I claim there is an invisible pink unicorn in my garage that directs
the universe and farts rainbows I hope you wouldn't just believe it.



Of course not. That's ridiculous. Everyone knows that pink unicorns
fart in monochrome.

On Wednesday, February 19, 2014 10:43:47 AM UTC-6, thumper wrote:
On 2/17/2014 8:07 PM, Tim wrote:



When science *CAN* prove there *IS NOT* a Divine Creator- I'll believe that science.

Me too!





I don't want to pick on you but it's a good example.



The burden of proof is on the one making the positive claim, not those

who doubt the claim due to lack of evidence.



If I claim there is an invisible pink unicorn in my garage that directs

the universe and farts rainbows I hope you wouldn't just believe it.
|
Well, I won't doubt that there may be one in there, but I'm not curious enough to check it out...

On 2/19/2014 2:20 PM, Tim wrote:
On Wednesday, February 19, 2014 10:43:47 AM UTC-6, thumper wrote:

If I claim there is an invisible pink unicorn in my garage that directs
the universe and farts rainbows I hope you wouldn't just believe it.

Well, I won't doubt that there may be one in there, but I'm not curious enough to check it out...

Yikes...! :-O