Jose Fly wrote: ↑Fri May 27, 2022 2:31 pm
Sherlock Holmes wrote: ↑Fri May 27, 2022 2:24 pm
So you affirm that we
can distinguish between the two alternative but refuse to say how you think we can do that, OK well that's a claim unsupported by evidence right there.
Uh.....no, that's not what I said
at all. In fact, your characterization is so disconnected from what I said, it's rather bizarre.
When asked if you agree or disagree with the proposition
"It is an inarguable fact that science cannot be used to show the universe was not created six thousand years ago with an appearance of great age (or rather with characteristics that we choose to interpret as great age)."
You replied
"Of course I disagree".
Therefore you
must believe that science
can be used to distinguish these two cases, you
must take that view if you disagree with the proposition.
Yet you cannot show me how you make the distinction, what scientific test you believe we can use to distinguish the two cases - that is your position is unsupported, it is an opinion, a belief.
Jose Fly wrote: ↑Fri May 27, 2022 2:31 pm
It is self evident.
How so?
I don't understand the question. Anything that is self-evident does not require supporting evidence or arguments, I regard "I exist" as self evident and likewise I regard "the past and future do not exist" as equally self evident.