10 Mar '14 22:05>2 edits
Originally posted by ZahlanziNo. I think you are wrong here. If there is no evidence to support something, the default stance should be a lack of belief in that thing.
do you insist on contradicting me just for fun?
there is scientific evidence to contradict a talking bush that might be god, but not all science contradicts a global flood? are you trolling me for a response?
if you have no evidence to support something, you say "i don't know". not "there is no such thing, period". that's what all people do, except people of faith. and hardcore atheists.
There is no evidence for invisible elephants in my fridge. So I will default to lacking belief in the existance of such creatures until such time as I see footprints in the butter.
<edit>I also suspect that TWitehead is wrong about the global flood. I think that all science that would be expected to have a bearing on such an event comes down against it</edit>
--- Penguin.