Blood Lord wrote:Uhh, yeah they do man. I don't know what part of the world you live, but they universally dismiss things without considering the other side or seek to prove it wrong.
I'll do as you say and cool down, as this IS a rage-button for me, but the quoted statement is something I have to address, with respect, as I vehemently disagree with it.
We are skeptical to the existence of the speculated until such time as evidence for it is forthcoming. This is due to the application of critical thinking.
We don't HAVE to prove someone wrong about the existence of a thing. We don't try to disprove things, yes. We don't do it at all, because it's a waste of time. You cannot prove a negative. I cannot tell you, with certainty, that Sasquatch doesn't exist at all. To do so is dishonest, because no matter what, the point-zero-zero-zero et cetera odds STILL allow for the possibility.
It's a thing we call "the burden of proof." For the aforementioned reasons, the burden of proof is ALWAYS upon the CLAIMANT: the person making the claim for existence. If it were otherwise, we would be forced to believe every absurdity presented to us, and every absurdity cannot possibly be reconciled with reality.
The thing is, we DO consider the other side. We hear their arguments. We don't go into this TRYING to prove them wrong, we ask them to CONVINCE us. But we find, time and time again, that the claims, the evidence put forth and the reasoning behind simply aren't compelling, and are more often than not patently dishonest or —in some cases— intentionally
We HAVE given these ideas a fair shake, and we're still open to the possibilities. But naturally, there comes a time when you find REASONABLE certainty as opposed to ABSOLUTE certainty, and it all becomes so much white noise. That's where you get the stereotype of the jaded, sneering skeptic. But if Twilight Sparkle suddenly teleported into my room, I wouldn't dismiss the existence of unicorns. I'd take pictures, get opinions outside myself and seriously wonder as to my sanity, but I think it would be proof enough.