reply to post by andrewh7
Christ this argument is so bloody stupid. I had a friend who wrote about this absolutely stupid argument, i am going to copypasta it here.
First, the main problem with this argument is that what people actually experience is NOT the same thing as what an atheist deliberately makes up for
the sake of argument! To put the two in the same category is both illogical and underhanded. Since the atheist using this argument hasn’t really
experienced invisible pink unicorns himself, everyone knows that he is deliberately making up something fictitious to put down something he doesn’t
believe in while the paranormal experiencer or claimant is not. Regardless of whether what the claimant experienced was real or not, it is certainly
NOT in the same category as what a skeptic makes up out of thin air. Comparing them would be like comparing my real life experience of visiting a
foreign country to any fictitious story you can find such as Peter Pan or The Wizard of Oz. That simply makes no sense, even if misperception was
involved on my part in my experience.
For the skeptic to claim that both are the same because they are unprovable would be like claiming that red cars and red apples are the same thing
because they’re both red. Though even skeptics know that this is not true, as mentioned, they prefer their beliefs and word games over common sense
reality. Alas, if these pseudoskeptics really lived according to their beliefs, then they could not function in society. For example, if they got
lost and had to ask for directions, they would not believe any directions given to them, not even from the most credible and well-meaning long-time
residents of the area they are lost in. They know this too, and thus this is all a word game to them, not a way to live in reality. So let’s just
hope for their sake that they don’t carry their silly little theories over to real life ………
Second, likewise what someone sincerely believes is NOT the same as what someone knowingly makes up. Since the skeptic who uses this argument
don’t believe in invisible pink unicorns himself, it is pointless as well as inconsiderate to compare that to what people genuinely believe and
experience, such as God, spirits, or ESP. Of course, just because someone genuinely believes something doesn’t make it true, but to compare an
honest person to a deliberate fraud is not a valid comparison.
Third, if there were millions of credible intelligent adults out there claiming to have seen or experienced invisible pink unicorns or Santa Claus
flying in the air, then this comparison would have merit. But there aren’t, so this comparison is without merit.
Fourth, another significant difference between experiencing God, the divine, or the mystical, and the fictional example of invisible pink unicorns is
that throughout history millions of honest, sane, intelligent people have experiences with the former which resulted in life changing effects, but the
same can't be said for invisible pink unicorns.
Fifth, just because something is unprovable does not automatically put it in the same category as everything else that is unprovable. For example,
I can’t prove what I ate last night for dinner or what I thought about. Without witnesses, I can’t prove what I saw on TV or how high I scored in
a video game either. But that doesn’t mean that these things are in the same category as every story in the fiction section of the library.
The bottom line is that while it is true that no one can disprove the existence of invisible pink unicorns, the evidence to support God, spirits and
psychic phenomena, although mostly anecdotal, is vastly greater, more significant, more relevant, and more sincere than the evidence to support
invisible pink unicorns, Santa Claus, and other fictitious examples deliberately made up by skeptics.