You do understand that “There is insufficient evidence for any god of any flavour” is a CLAIM, right?
Can you DEMONSTRATE THAT CLAIM?
Or do you think it is TRUE until PROVEN FALSE, as I said?
Which is it?
Can you DEMONSTRATE THAT CLAIM?
Or do you think it is TRUE until PROVEN FALSE, as I said?
Which is it?
Because every time you say “burden of proof!” or “prove it!” you are saying you are right unless you are proven wrong.
And THAT is an argument from ignorance.
“I don’t know that God exists, so God does not exist unless I acquire this knowledge.”
And THAT is an argument from ignorance.
“I don’t know that God exists, so God does not exist unless I acquire this knowledge.”
Which is of course idiocy, since the existence of God does not depend on your lack of knowledge.
(For that matter “atheists make no claim” is a claim, and a stupidly self-refuting one, so no one needs to bother with it.)
