Yes, but absence of evidence isn’t evidence for anything.
It’s wild how many need to find them some scientific method.
I was only pointing out, in my original comment, that I’m sure around the world people pray/say all sorts of things when a plane is crashing, not just the Christian god. But because they’re only focusing on crashes in the US, they are concluding that everyone prays to god (presumably, the Christian one).
Isnt it though? If i say i own a car but never carry car keys, my home has no garage or on-street parking spot, that is evidence that i dont own a car.
so you didn’t know which god saved them either. It could be the flying spaghetti monster. (note the existence of this religion is literally based on your statement)
It’s just a twee catchphrase christians came up with to say you can’t prove a negative. It’s not anything new, and it’s not actually contributing anything. It’s a core aspect of “burden of proof”, and this is just a way of shifting said burden to the people asking for evidence of the divine instead of leaving it on the people asserting that the divine exists in the first place.
The absence of evidence isn’t evidence of absence
Yes, but absence of evidence isn’t evidence for anything.
It’s wild how many need to find them some scientific method.
I was only pointing out, in my original comment, that I’m sure around the world people pray/say all sorts of things when a plane is crashing, not just the Christian god. But because they’re only focusing on crashes in the US, they are concluding that everyone prays to god (presumably, the Christian one).
Isnt it though? If i say i own a car but never carry car keys, my home has no garage or on-street parking spot, that is evidence that i dont own a car.
so you didn’t know which god saved them either. It could be the flying spaghetti monster. (note the existence of this religion is literally based on your statement)
Wow thats deep
(dunno if you’re being sarcastic)
It’s just a twee catchphrase christians came up with to say you can’t prove a negative. It’s not anything new, and it’s not actually contributing anything. It’s a core aspect of “burden of proof”, and this is just a way of shifting said burden to the people asking for evidence of the divine instead of leaving it on the people asserting that the divine exists in the first place.