Rule 4 of the
Forum Guidelines says:
- Make your points by providing supporting argument. Avoid bare assertions. Because it is often not possible to tell which points will prove controversial, it is acceptable to wait until a point is challenged before supporting it.
I think your point has been challenged.
Rule 2 of the
Forum Guidelines says:
- Debate in good faith by addressing rebuttals through the introduction of new information or by providing additional argument. Do not merely keep repeating the same points without elaboration.
You are repeating the same argument post after post.
While I can't speak for the other moderators, I'm not going to resort to administrative actions to influence you to follow these guidelines, but I don't believe any useful discussion will develop until you do. I would guess that by this time even the Creationist lurkers are asking themselves, "Why is he so reluctant to cite the evidence? Does he not know it? Is it weak? What's going on here?"
Others have already adequately addressed the inherent difficulties surrounding negative evidence, which is what you keep requesting. If you're going to simply refuse to acknowledge this reality of inductive logic then I don't think I have any special powers of persuasion that would make me any more likely to convince you.
Just so there's no ambiguity, if this were a debate I were moderating, I would long ago have defaulted you for refusing to support your position. It has nothing to do with your position and everything to do with your refusal to actually debate. I, for one, would find an examination of the evidence for apostolic martyrdom fascinating.
-- | Percy |
| EvC Forum Administrator |