One pill makes you larger and one pill makes you small, and the ones that Mother gives you don't do anything at all, Go ask Alice, when she's ten feet tall - Jefferson Airplane
You sort of nailed it Red though probably not as you intended. Your comment that there is a long standing and pervasive belief in a deity one that goes back at least 100,000 years and includes the Neanderthals is an indication there is more than the simple " just the facts" argument so many make (both pro & anti). I would be surprised if science proves a deity's existence or lack there of in my life time or ever. You are also right that the 275 religions show they aren't the answer in themselves. They really can't be as they are really institutions of man not God. There is a difference between faith and a religion. Man does the best he can with metaphors and similes and forms but they are as limited and as fallible as the men that form and run them. You can't prove or disprove if a god exists or that faith isn't a genuine manifestation of god's existence.
I. Argumentum ad Ignorantiam: (appeal to ignorance) the fallacy that a proposition is true simply on the basis that it has not been proved false or that it is false simply because it has not been proved true. This error in reasoning is often expressed with influential rhetoric. A. The informal structure has two basic patterns: Statement p is unproved. Not-p is true. Statement not-p is unproved. p is true. B. If one argues that God or telepathy, ghosts, or UFO's do not exist because their existence has not been proven beyond a shadow of doubt, then this fallacy occurs. C. On the other hand, if one argues that God, telepathy, and so ondo exist because their non-existence has not been proved, then one argues fallaciously as well.
I respect your right to disagree Red....I think we've established our positions on this aren't changing. That said.... I. Argumentum ad Ignorantiam: (appeal to ignorance) the fallacy that a proposition is true simply on the basis that it has not been proved false or that it is false simply because it has not been proved true. This error in reasoning is often expressed with influential rhetoric. A. The informal structure has two basic patterns: Statement p is unproved. Not-p is true. Statement not-p is unproved. p is true. B. If one argues that God or telepathy, ghosts, or UFO's do not exist because their existence has not been proven beyond a shadow of doubt, then this fallacy occurs. C. On the other hand, if one argues that God, telepathy, and so ondo exist because their non-existence has not been proved, then one argues fallaciously as well.
I can't imagine what you think this misplaced fallacy applies to. In fact you have it backwards. You have contended all along that people who disbelieve in unicorns are as guilty of having no proof as the believers of mythical creatures. This itself is an appeal to ignorance. People are free to disbelieve myths, they don't have to disprove them.
I was going to post this in the Little Known Facts thread but it seems more appropriate to put it here. Sterculinius was the Roman God of Animal Dung
