You seem to forget that it is not up to the non-believer to prove that
something does not exist, but the responsiblity of the believer to
proof that it does exist. You are right in that it is impossible to
prove something doesn't exist, but it is possible to prove something
does exist. To date, no one has proved the existence of goblins or
gods, but we wait with open minds for any evidence that either of
these beings do exist.

Chuckles

On Thu, 01 Apr 2004 00:39:01 GMT, "Weatherwax"
<weatherwax@worldnet.net> wrote:

"Virgil" <ITSnetNOTcom/virgil@COMCAST.com> wrote in
< CLIP >

Clear, logical and true.

Until X is proven not to exist, X cannot be known not to
exist, and as long as X cannot be known not to exist, one
must allow that X might exist.

I personally think that there is little chance that any god
can exist, but as a loyal agnostic, I must reject any
statement that it is impossible without it has been proved
impossible.

Consider the following scenario:

Your six year old child tells you that there is a goblin
under the bed. The child is absolutely certain of this.

You look under the bed and discover:
1) A goblin
2) Dust.

If it is the first case, you get the child out of the room.
There is a goblin under his bed.

If it is the second case, then you conclude that there is
no goblin, or that the has disappeared, or is invisible,
or that the goblin is hiding someplace else, or it has
disguised itself, or that the dust is the goblin, or that it
is too dark to see the goblin, or . . . .

You have no definite proof that the goblin does not
exist, but you do not give up. You have other people
check under the bed. You stand a twenty-four hour
watch. You bring in dogs and electronic detecting
equipment. None of these measures produce any
positive results indicating that there is a goblin under
the bed. But these tests are inconclusive because
they can be wrong.

To make absolutely sure, you bring in a psychic to do
a reading of the bed. The psychic's opinion is definite:
There is a goblin under the bed."

Under circumstance 2, above:
1) Do you conclude that there is a goblin under the bed?
2) Do you accept the inconclusive evidence that there
is no goblin under the bed?
3) Or do you reject any statement that the goblin does
not exist without it having been proved to be
non-existence?.

How does the question on the existence of a goblin differ from
the question on the existence of God?

How does your answer to the existence of the goblin differ from
your answer to the question on the existence of God?