WolfpackN64 said:
This does not disprove anything at all. It's one thing to meet and disregard religious claims, it's something else to actually bring your own proof to the table. What people don't understand about proof of burden is that 1. It works both in a positive as in a negative sense & 2. Unless you're a sceptic, empirical proof isn't the only form of proof, for if that was the case, our own science wouldn't even be able to operate correctly. |
What form of non-empirical proof is necessary for science to operate correctly?
...
