September 30, 2004

edens morgan mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges wrote:

Paul Lawler wrote:

wrote in

P.S. Asking me to give proof that something does not exist is a
logical fallacy.

another idiot attempting to be logical

i hate to break it to you
but somethings can be proven not to exist
and this can be very important

How would you do that?

why not state the issue correctly

the burden of proof of a statement
lies on the person making the statement

whether the statement is negative existential
is irrelevant to the metalogical requirements

Ah yes... but if you recall the original statement was be EvoBob saying
that the existence of extraterrestrial life was "obvious" to anyone. I
challenged him to prove that there is extraterrestrial life, and he
responded with, "prove there is not." The burden of proof remains with
him.

confusing levels of discourse is not being logical
especially when you dont even realize the different levels

Idjits arguing, I just love usenet science.

It has very little to do with 'proof'. Educate yourself idhts.

http://www.av8n.com/physics/

Proof is mathematical, science is demonstrative.

It has to do with 'evidence' and the totality of scientific evidence clearly
indicates that ET is far more probable, nearly infinitely more probable, than
NO ET.

It appears that it is human intelligence on the Planet Earth that seems to be
in such short supply.

The evidential basis lies with the claim, not the claimant.

Thomas Lee Elifritz
http://elifritz.members.atlantic.net