Absence of evidence IS evidence of absence

" Lack of evidence simply means you do not have any evidence to prove something. If there is no evidence, You can"t make a definite claim either way. " That was a dumb statement. Let's go back to the example that I gave you. Once you return from using the bathroom while visiting me in my home and I tell you about the elephant that supposedly just walked through. You would think I was lying on account of the overwhelming lack of evidence to support what I said. Why is that? If absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, Would wouldn't you just believe every bit of nonsense that came out of my mouth? Heck, Why not believe in unicorns or dragons? Oh right, Because the lack of evidence leads us to believe that they don't exist. The difference is that people tend to have a double standard of evidence for god. Where someone won't believe in unicorns because there is no evidence, They are all to eager to use faith to believe in a deity. "While I would agree that lack of evidence may point one in the direction of making it reasonable to believe it doesn"t exist" Okay good. So we are on the same page? "It doesn"t necessarily PROVE it doesn"t exist. " Oh, I see what the problem is, You think proof and evidence are the same thing. Well, They're not. Evidence is usually described as facts that can indicate whether a belief is valid. For example, You can assume unicorns don't exist because we've never seen them. That exact LACK of evidence for unicorns to exist, Acts as evidence that they DON'T exist (meaning absence of evidence is indeed evidence of absence). Proof on the other hand shows without a shadow of a doubt that something is true or valid. Proof requires evidence, But evidence does not require proof. If you wanted to make the point that "Absence of proof is not proof of absence", That statement would be true and you could very well make that argument. However we are not talking about proof, We are talking about evidence. " Does it mean X does not equal Y? No, It simply means I cannot show (prove, Say definitively, Etc) that X equals Y. X could very well still equal Y, But I just don"t have the capability to prove it. " Again, I am not talking about PROOF. I am talking about EVIDENCE. Something can have a lot of evidence without being proven, Like the big bang, For example. Just because we haven't PROVED the big bang doesn't mean that there isn't a ton of EVIDENCE to support it. This is a example of you being ignorant. You are only arguing with me because you got something wrong. Your ignorance is the only reason you are actually debating me right now, Because you honestly think that evidence means proof when it doesn't. You can assume that unicorns don't exist without proving that they don't. Do you understand? Do I have to explain this any further? " By stating this, You are already asserting that it is TRUE statement-- that the absence of evidence indicates something doesn't exist. Isn't this what you are trying to prove? You can't say "I'm going to show that X is true", And then start your argument by saying X is true, And ask the opponent to accept that. " WHAT? ! What are you saying even? What is your point? Can something please translate this gibberish for me? From what I read, It was just vacuous nonsense. I am 99% sure that this guy is a Jordan Peterson fan because he speaks in some code with no real point, And just disguises it with pretty words. The JP word salad at it's finest. "Not only that, You are saying that this is the ONLY way to indicate something doesn't exist. I call this false or misleading " Okay well I expect you to back up that claim. Oh look, You did no such thing. What a surprise. " In your scenario you are confusing "existing" with "being present somewhere"" No, No I'm not. I'm talking about evidence. In the scenario I gave you, I provided no evidence to support my claim, And I stated that you wouldn't believe me for that reason. What you just said is in no way relevant. " I"d look around and say "Hmmmm, There is no evidence an elephant has been here. Does this prove elephants don"t exist? " " It's not about whether or not elephants exist, It's about whether or not there was one in my house based on the zero evidence to support that it was. Whether or not elephants exist is not the point, It's about whether or not I had evidence to support my claim. Not to mention, In the claim I made, I was insisting that elephants do indeed exist, Otherwise how would there be one IN MY FUKKING HOUSE? ! ? ! Ugh, You are a moron. I swear, It's harder to argue with idiots than it is with smart people. At least when you make a point to a smart person it doesn't just go in one ear and out the other. ")What if instead of an elephant, It was a fly. I look around and I simply don"t see any evidence a fly was in the room. I then turn to you and say "Flies don"t exist! There is no evidence in here that flies exist! "" I would call you a moron. " I"m sure you"d argue differently. But this is exactly what you are doing when you say "I don"t see any evidence, Therefore it must not exist! " That's not what I'm saying you ignorant twat. For the last time, Evidence and proof are not the same thing. I am looking at a lack of evidence and saying that it's safe to assume that whatever thing does not exist, Or in the case of the elephant, It wasn't in my house. At no point did I say elephants or flies don't exist, I was talking about whether or not a FUKKING ELEPHANT WALKED THROUGH MY HOUSE! There was no reason to think so, So why would you. I dunno man, I guess I'm not surprised. People truly are retarded. I think your god did a terrible job designing our brains because there is no way a genius all knowing god would create something as stupid as you.