Originally Posted by Bigus
Right, because that's exactly what science is, just making up truths as we go along, no need to worry about logic, evidence... rolleyes.gif And because believers in audiomagic would never ever be caught doing such a thing? The undeniable braincrushing logic of your argument had convinced me!
You distort science if suits your argument which is the big difference here. Your own biases and prejudices are affecting your judgments and YOU are not seeing things objectively. If anything your objectivity has been compromised. All you care about is reciting what someone else said on the internet like a parrot.
Parrot .. parrot and more parroting.
Dude, first you seem incapable of grasping the logical impossibility of proving the negative. Second, what can be done is amass evidence that suggests the negative is highly likely, what is precisely what objectivists ie scientists have done, and without question fulfills your requirement to "shoulder your own claim". Lol. Third, where is the evidence from the positive claim, your claim? Where? Anything
Uh dude, generally the burden of proof falls on whomever
is making a claim, regardless of the positive or negative nature of that claim. It's fairly easy to imagine how any positive claim could be rephrased so as to be a negative one, and it's difficult to imagine that this should reasonably remove the asserter's burden of proof.
Yes, impossible to prove a negative. You think? Many philosophers and logicians actually disagree with the catchphrase "you can't prove a negative". A fundamental law of logic, the law of non-contradiction, makes it relatively straightforward to prove a negative.
I make the claim that "there is no intelligent life on other planets". Certainly it seems intuitive that I possess the burden of proof for such a statement. But as discussed, it would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, for me to actually provide a compelling proof of this claim, because it's impossible to conclusively examine the entire contents of this and every other universe, looking for intelligent life (even putting aside such technical issues as what barometer we use to measure "intelligence", or even "life").
You want to have your cake and eat it!
What I care about is whether it is secondary to real differences in the soundwaves reaching your ears, as that is tangible data that might help improve my own experience.
Misinterpreting the data to fit your own scientific beliefs is the main problem here. You clearly aren't thinking clearly in this thread. Science does not have all the answers but YOU like to *think* it does - please stop claiming that you don't think science have all the answers. See what I did there?
I don't shoulder any responsibility to support that claim. I'm going to ignore you now as you are wasting my time!