Hi RAZD, I've wanted to stay out of this one so so bad, and I have, but it's killing me that the reason for asking the question isn't itself questioned.
But the issue here is not claiming that "something does not exist" it is with claiming to know the likelihood, to have sufficient evidence to make an informed decision.
But doesn't it in fact have to go one step further?
It's not so much the informed decision and the sufficient evidence to support it that should be evaluated, but rather the sufficient evidence to propose an informed question.
Wouldn't someone asking the question need sufficent evidence to even propose the question?
Why would the answer require such objective empirical evidence when the question was asked speculatively?
- Oni
Edited by onifre, : No reason given.
™ Version 4.2