Soyeong: 1. If it indicates that something is true, then it is evidence that it is true. If there is no evidence, then you need to explain how it is possible for someone to form a belief without anything indicating to them that it is true.
2. The Romans were no slouches at executions.
3. It's not even humanly possible to believe something without evidence.
4. Belief is being confident in your knowledge.
5.If you want to argue against something, it's generally wise to figure out why Christians believe in God and not in Santa.
6. It's really strange that you would claim there is no evidence for the existence of extraterrestrials and then immediately contradict yourself by giving evidence for them.
1. Really? You should check up your definition of proof / evidence, and compare yours to the scientific one.
Literally anything could be a confirmation of truth, if thats what the person wants to see. Do I really need to give you examples of this?
People used to believe that earth is a flat surface, obviously they had some reasoning behind it. So, do you believe them? Do you think their supposed evidence, their proofs are credible? Do you think the earth is flat? After all, they had some factors indicating it to them, lol.
2. Point being? I guess that they have really killed him. Well, that doesnt prove that he actually came back from the dead. Also, the fact that they werent slouches, doesnt really mean much, does it? Do you think in a criminal investigation, the approach is as the one you've presented? "They werent slouches, then there's 0% chance of a fk up".
So that statement doesnt make sense no matter how you look at it (as in, I dont see it as a compelling argument).
3. I've pretty much explained it it *1
Anything can by a piece of evidence for anyone. If it's actually 'legit' evidence, is a completely separate matter.
4. Belief and knowledge are 2 separate things. Lets say someone does something bad. You have your suspicions, based on sth, so you may believe that this person is guilty, but you cant say that you know it. Without hard evidence there can be no talk about knowledge in the strict sense.
Of course if you have a strong belief in sth, then even the smallest thing might turn into hard evidence in your eyes.
5. Wut? It was merely an example of my non-believing attitude. I dont know, but I presume that children are supposed to believe in santa, at least judging it by all these chrissmassy movies etc. I don't know, maybe I wasnt unique, maybe there are no children who believe in him. I know that I didnt.
I have never believed in god either, I just went to church cos that was the thing to do.
6. I didnt contradict myself, at least not in that matter, as I did not present any evidence for their existence, only my take on the subject, using simple logic - if a process has happened once, then it means that it is possible, so taking in consideration the scale of the universe, the posibility turns into a really high propability.