Religion
In reply to the discussion: Can you give an example of an argument against religion that is ... [View all]Sal316
(3,373 posts)I'm asking him to prove his claim of "no scientific evidence". I'm not asking him to prove a negative. Congratulations on missing the point.
If there's no evidence, then there's obviously a test methodology that can distinguish between a positive and negative indication. We'll stick with the hard sciences, since that's typically what's referred to in making the 'no evidence' claim.
As a scientist, negative results are often reported as "not detected", which is another way of saying "no evidence of".
So, that leaves few options.
1) The poster made an unprovable claim.
2) Humanity, through science, has developed to where they can detect the presence, or lack of, God in which case there would be a published test methodology in existence.
3) The poster meant "no evidence yet", which means humanity has yet to develop the scientific acumen, instrumentation, and methodology to definitively say there is/isn't scientific evidence. This goes back to point #1.