"news stories and conjecture."
If you had read what was inside those stories, you would have seen the evidence is clear. Perhaps you should go back and have a read.
i showed that the official US line about Zarqawi is based on unreliable, and often contradictory sources.
I showed that the official US line was often false.
I showed that the people who the US say are meant to be seeing him,
And since the US is the only people asking us to belive in him, what evidence do we have that he still exists, or even existed at all?
These are the things that i based my evidence on. my evidence may not have been irrefutable to you, but i never claimed that i would give irrefutable
evidence. I said i would give evidence, and i did. Take it or leave it.
When i said, "why don't YOU provide ME. with SOLID evidence that he does exist?" i was merely trying to demonstrate, that you can't prove a
negative. It is up to the person who makes the claim that something exists, to prove that it exists.
In that very thread at the very begining, i admited i was in a lazy mood, i asked you to be patient, and i finnished submitting the evidence. You
didn't even look at it twice. But i'm glad you ask, since now i have this power at my fingertips.
"This 'argument' started because you had reason to believe that the level of evidence required on this site for theories to be believed is too
Wrong, i belive that evidence on this site, isn't even called evidence.
"or that people refuse to believe theories without rigourous, detailed backing to claims"
Wrong, i have always said, you can belive what you want to belive, take the evidence or leave it. BUt don't say we didn't give evidence, because by
definiton, we did.
"I believe that theories do require detail and rigour before they can be taken above what makes sense to you personaly, no one believes something
that doesn't make sense to them on a personal level, and i require hard evidence to be convinced. This is something i don't think you provided.
The evidence i provided to you may not have been hard enough by your standard. That's fair enough,i have no problem with that. But you can't say i
didn't have any evidence at all.
"As for this thread, what Djarums said is what I believe, that if you claim proof then you should have evidence"
I never claimed to have proof, because you can't prove a negative, i claimed to have evidence, and i gave evidence.
if you had read it, you would see it was not just conjecture and speculation, but quite logical.