XPost: alt.agnosticism, alt.athiesm, alt.talk.creationism   
   XPost: sci.skeptic   
      
   On Tue, 04 Nov 2014 07:04:14 -0700, Bob Casanova  wrote:   
   .   
   >On Tue, 04 Nov 2014 23:28:38 +1100, the following appeared   
   >in sci.skeptic, posted by felix_unger :   
   >   
   >>On 04-November-2014 10:12 PM, Sylvia Else wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> On 4/11/2014 9:58 PM, felix_unger wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>> not when there are literally billions of people who consider they have   
   >>>> good reason(s) to believe. only ppl who want to deny the existence of   
   >>>> God try to claim that no evidence of God exists.   
   >>>   
   >>> That they believe is only evidence of their belief. It isn't evidence   
   >>> of the correctness of their belief.   
   >>   
   >>belief isn't evidence of belief. it's evidence for what is believed in.   
   >   
   >As both you and I have noted, your definition of evidence   
   >isn't what is meant by evidence to someone who's interested   
   >in whether that evidence has a basis in fact. And as has   
   >also been noted, the evidence for the existence of Santa is   
   >of exactly the same quality as the evidence for the   
   >existence of deities. *Any* deities.   
      
       The evidence for Santa is that gifts saying from Santa appear in the house,   
   and people how are trusted explain that Santa brought them. Weeks or months   
   before they appear people are told by other people they trust that Santa will   
   come and bring them, then they appear. Other people also explain the same thing   
   and have the same experience of gifts being left, with ALL EVIDENCE saying it   
   was Santa who left them. Other people know better than those they lie to but   
   still ALL EVIDENCE points to Santa's existence. I don't believe any of you are   
   honestly so extremely stupid you're not aware of that, but if you truly are   
   then   
   this entire topic is just so far over your head that you'll never be more than   
   an idiot in regards to it. Even if you're not too stupid to understand what I   
   pointed out for you but you're dishonestly pretending to be this topic might   
   still be beyond you.   
      
       Even though none of you can comprehend the distinctions I'm about to point   
   out for you, they still very much do exist and are very significant. People who   
   learn the truth about the evidence for Santa learn about the lie, and in fact   
   delibarately promote and support the lie. In HUGE contrast to that situation,   
   NO   
   ONE knows God does not exist. NO ONE know there is no God associated with   
   Earth.   
   None of you atheists have any way of finding out if there is not. All you have   
   is faith in your own chosen belief being correct and belief without   
   corroborating objective evidence is evidence of only belief.   
      
   >As Sylvia noted, and has been noted many times in the past,   
   >belief without corroborating objective evidence is evidence   
   >of only belief.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)