It has been stated here at EvC and at other evo/creo fora the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
So be it. When I say I don't believe in any gods I get asked what evidence is there that no gods exist?
From my own experience I find that those who believe in Jehovah reject Zeus. My point is what evidence are these Theists using to reject Zeus, Ra, Thor, Xipe, etc.
I personally don't have a problem with how people come to being atheists. I think that is fine. I do take exception of the "absence of evidence, is evidence of absence" schtick though.
It's simply not true, because "evidence" is positive. A lack of evidence in one direction is not positive evidence in another by default.
Again, it was theorized that water was on the moon. They sought it out but found none. IOW, there was an absence of evidence. That does not mean that there is now "evidence" that no water exists on the moon, it simply means that there was no evidence to suggest there is.
We now know otherwise that there is water on the moon. That being the case, if the phrase "absence of evidence is EVIDENCE of absence" is true, then no water could ever be found since this is a positive declaration.
As this relates to gods and the supernatural, I am not suggesting that because it is theoretically possible for such to exist that you then have to follow some arbitrary rule to adhere to the possibility. I say that especially in light of anything being theoretically possible.
But absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." --John Adams
™ Version 4.2
(1)
