Why would I need evidence? I'm not the one here making the claim. You're the one, John. And you can't produce any evidence to support your claim.Translation- Drew has absolutely no evidence.
Doesn't exist, since I don't own this forum. Topix does.His.forum
Says the guy who makes claims (such as "There is a prime mover") but who can't back them up. You're not really in any position to claim that others aren't credible.Further he uses words like logical and rational with no credibility.
Why? Your claim doesn't rise or fall depending up some other claim. It rises or falls on its own. And since you can't produce any evidence to support it, it falls.Make up a rational and logical beginning
You mean,*your* non-case, John, the case where you claim that a prime mover is responsible for the existence of the Universe, but a case that you can't back with any evidence. You'd be thrown right out of court, John.The court would not hear your noncase
No, John, the judge would have to explain to *you* that your claim isn't backed by any evidence and therefore, you have failed to make your case.The judge would have to explain to you that my contentions are predicated on a particular action on your end.
It was logically fallacious, John. And I caught you at it. Saying "I meant to do that" after the fact won't get you out of trouble.The appeal to majority was purposeful