This whole discussion reminds me of the joke about a mathematician and an engineer being on one side of a room with a scantily clad female seated on the other end. When told that they could only move half the distance between themselves and the woman each time they took steps forward, the mathematician refused to move as he would never reach the woman. The engineer immediately began crossing the room saying "I'll get close enough for all practical purposes!" .
Most people live their lives on the practical assumption that absence of evidence is evidence of absence (until there is further evidence to refute it). So in general most people dismiss IPUs, orbiting teapots, Yeti, bigfoot, etc out of hand and so therefore, by RAZD's view, would be pseudoskeptics. Many people, me included also use this practical logic to dismiss the supernatural and supernatural beings until any positive evidence is provided (as there is zero evidence so far).
I don't see how dismissing somebody elses claim for something that they have no evidence for is asserting a negative position that I need to back up with evidence of my own. I'm not trying to refute the claim, I'm just making a practical decision to ignore/dimiss an unevidenced claim until there is evidence for it.
So RAZD are you really agnostic to orbiting teapots or not.
Edited by kjsimons, : No reason given.
™ Version 4.2
