> brother, we are all walking around with a supercomputer in our pocket thats capable of accessing the sum total of human knowledge and yet we're still stuck with people who think the earth is flat.

And even more people believe there's an old man on a cloud judging everyone, so what?

▲

graemep 22 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

That is a strawman. Who believes in an old man on a cloud judging everyone? Far fewer people believe anything like that than believe. Even online I have never come across anyone whose beliefs could be reasonably characterised that way.

▲

Forgeties79 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I’m not religious but there’s a significant difference here.

Burden of proof is on the person making the assertion in both cases, but we can’t prove without a doubt that god doesn’t exist even if we don’t feel there’s enough evidence to suggest he is. There is, however, concrete evidence the earth isn’t flat, so no matter who the burden is on it’s demonstrably false.

Put another way: You can concretely observe without a doubt that not only is the earth not flat, but also that it can’t be flat. We can’t confidently say god can’t exist.

▲

graemep 19 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

and most people who believe in God will cite some evidence - religious experiences, or philosophical proofs or whatever. Whether you accept that evidence is sufficient or not, it is in an entirely different class.

	▲	Forgeties79 10 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Sure but I’m just not even opening that can of worms. I’m just focusing on the very clear cut difference here

▲

technothrasher an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

I don't think you've thought through what you're trying to assert. A god could make you believe anything they wanted to about the earth. So if you cannot disprove a god, then you cannot disprove the theory that the earth is flat.

	▲	virgilp 17 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		You can still believe that the scientific method works; and might leads you to 2 conclusions: (a) "I can prove earth is not flat" (using this methodology) (b) I cannot prove there is no God, though I may believe the prevalence of evidence does not support the hypothesis, there's no scientific test that I can design.
	▲	detourdog an hour ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		I’m not sure you thought this through. Why would G-d want to or care to make one have thoughts.
	▲	Forgeties79 9 minutes ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Just because you think I am wrong does not mean I have failed to think through the various components/implications of my statement. I can disprove that the Earth is flat with the incredibly varied, concrete, observable evidence that it is not. It comes in many forms and is undeniable, hence the lengths flat earthers have to go to to “prove” the evidence is all just a collection of lies that serve some nebulous, nefarious purpose (they don’t even agree on what that is) that serves some faceless evil group they prop up (usually “the deep state” or Jewish people). On the other hand, I do not have concrete, observable evidence that God does not exist. That’s the thrust of my point.

▲

an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

[deleted]