| WolfpackN64 said: Proof of burden DOES go both ways since negative claims are being made (and since arguments have been provided on one side). |
Any claim needs to meet the burden of proof.
Read the link I provided.
I also suggest you read up on how the burden of proof is handled within a legal framework as to why someone doesn't need to provide evidence that God doesn't exist, I have provided all the appropriate reading material for you to peruse.
And I will use the Kangaroo example again... I can assert that I ride a Kangaroo to work every day. - In your scenario, you would need to provide evidence that I do not, otherwise it's true, yes? Do you see the problem here?
That is why the burden of proof would fall onto me to prove that I ride a Kangaroo to work everyday... Otherwise anyone, anywhere, can make up any crazy conspiracy theory and assert it as being true because no one can prove otherwise.
And just so we are clear... As an Atheist I am not stating God doesn't exist. I am stating that there is no evidence and thus that claim can be discarded until such a time until there is.
But what there is evidence for is Evolution, Big Bang, Abiogensis and more that contradicts large swathes of the theistic view point.
www.youtube.com/@Pemalite
