edit: nope. i'm done lol you're ridiculous

This post was edited by Derkaderk on Dec 16 2011 05:59pm

You just realized how you couldn't prove Africa existed.
/end

and you still haven't realized that absolute proof isn't necessary for the existence of something

You know what? You're right, the Yeti, Jesus, Gozilla and King Kong all existed. I can't prove it, but I swear they did.

Exactly
and the earth was flat. Those assholes who said otherwise just changed it to prove their theories.

This post was edited by Derkaderk on Dec 16 2011 06:13pm

In the long run, Africa still doesn't exist.

That was a tasty 17,000th post.

This post was edited by Trademarks on Dec 16 2011 06:12pm

So I have to ask, in your philosophy, if you obtain proof, were you wrong before, or did it come into existence exactly when you obtained proof?

How do you exactly "obtain proof"? What I perceive is real, what I don't perceive isn't. I know what there is when I get out of my house, but until I have to face everything, how can I know it exist?

But why do you feel that:
"I don't know if it exists, therefore it doesn't exist" is logically sound? That conclusion isn't necessarily entailed by that premise.
And by obtain proof I meant observe it. Like, you don't know if Africa exists -> it doesn't exist. You go to Africa -> it exists. Did it suddenly begin existing when you arrived, or were you wrong before?
It sounds like you refuse axiomatic logic, so do you disagree with mathematics?

This post was edited by Derkaderk on Dec 16 2011 06:21pm

If I introduce you to a brand new animal specie you have never seen before, how would you react?