I'm not avoiding anything, since you didn't ask *me* to prove it. And no, it's not up to "us" to disprove God. This is an essential concept in the world of truth and science -- the burden of proof lies on those who claim something. Atheists don't need evidence; until there is any evidence showing or at least supporting God (incidentally, there is *no* evidence to support God, there are just misinterpretations of events), the only reasonable thing to assume is that he doesn't.
If it were up to atheists to disprove God, then I could just say that Pi ends with digit 0 at 100-billionth place, and it's up to you to prove that it doesn't. And until you prove it, we should all assume it's true, because I made a claim, completely unsupported with evidence. Well, it doesn't work that way, does it?
The burden of proof lies on you, my friend. It's not up to us to prove that Flying Spaghetti Monster doesn't exist, it's up to those silly people that claim it does to prove it. And given that you take a scientific approach, you'll notice that not a single shred of evidence ever existed to support existence of any supernatural beings or events -- unless you count fiction books as proof, of course. So what was it in the first place that got you thinking there even might be such thing? It wasn't reason, that's for sure.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not avoiding anything, since you didn't ask *me* to prove it. And no, it's not up to "us" to disprove God. This is an essential concept in the world of truth and science -- the burden of proof lies on those who claim something. Atheists don't need evidence; until there is any evidence showing or at least supporting God (incidentally, there is *no* evidence to support God, there are just misinterpretations of events), the only reasonable thing to assume is that he doesn't.
If it were up to atheists to disprove God, then I could just say that Pi ends with digit 0 at 100-billionth place, and it's up to you to prove that it doesn't. And until you prove it, we should all assume it's true, because I made a claim, completely unsupported with evidence. Well, it doesn't work that way, does it?
The burden of proof lies on you, my friend. It's not up to us to prove that Flying Spaghetti Monster doesn't exist, it's up to those silly people that claim it does to prove it. And given that you take a scientific approach, you'll notice that not a single shred of evidence ever existed to support existence of any supernatural beings or events -- unless you count fiction books as proof, of course. So what was it in the first place that got you thinking there even might be such thing? It wasn't reason, that's for sure.