All right, let’s start again with no more assumptions about what you think I might possibly mean.
I know exactly what you mean.
Literally, you said there was evidence of Jesus’s existence.
Yes, due to the fact I agree with historians that contemporary sources are evidence, I say there is evidence.
I literally only asked for one example of said evidence.
And I gave you 8 contemporary sources and listed more.
The issue is that you disagree with the scientific community this is valid and are demanding physical evidence.
I’ve told you multiple times no physical evidence exists. It’s an impossible demand, and there’s nothing to show you.
I am not asking for books or videos
You asked if I had any other evidence but what i gave you or if we were done here and I said “yes we are done here” because there’s nothing fucking else to give you. Get that through your dumb skull holy shit. How are we this many comments deep into you still not getting there’s no physical evidence and I have never claimed there to be.
If your default position is to disagree with the overwhelming consensus of scientists, but then instead of learning even the slightest about what they’re saying you choose to argue with randos on social media about it you’re just anti intelligence. You’re choosing to be dumber on purpose. I’m not here for that shit.
You clearly don’t know what I mean, since I’ve said repeatedly that other people’s claims or beliefs don’t constitute evidence.
I asked for actual evidence. If you have none, you could have said that near the beginning of this conversation rather than whatever you’ve been doing.
You also clearly don’t know what I mean since you’ve been attributing random meanings to me that have been wrong every time. I don’t have nefarious purposes, I actually just want the actual evidence you claimed to have, and I don’t put stock in people’s stories, because people are often mistaken for many reasons. For evidence to be taken seriously , it should not rely on subjective accounts.
So it sounds like you don’t have evidence, you have stories.
If you have none, you could have said that near the beginning of this conversation rather than whatever you’ve been doing.
Once I realized you had a radically strict criteria for what types of evidence could be considered “actual evidence” far and beyond what the most serious scholars and historians would apply, I did say that.
Right here I said we were done and I had nothing more I could give you.
You also clearly don’t know what I mean since you’ve been attributing random meanings to me that have been wrong every time. I don’t have nefarious purposes, I actually just want the actual evidence you claimed to have
I gave you the evidence I claimed to have.
You want evidence I never claimed to have, but which you mistakenly think I did.
and I don’t put stock in people’s stories, because people are often mistaken for many reasons. For evidence to be taken seriously , it should not rely on subjective accounts.
Are you sure?
Earlier you told me we know Australopithecus existed because we found their bones.
I believe some scientist may have found a bone, but why do you accept its as old as they say it is, why do you accept it belonged to a distinct species called Australopithecus? Where’s the physical evidence of that?
In between the Australopithecus and the homo sapien there are quite a few missing links that need stories to fill them in.
Maybe they migrated this way in this period? Maybe the water was lower and there was an ice bridge here? Maybe this was a distinct species and not a direct ancestor?
These are all stories aren’t they, opinions of archaeologists and paleontologists and biologists?
Why do you consider finding a weird looking bone evidence of Australopithecus if you don’t follow the subjective accounts of evolutionary scientists and archaeologists when they’re dating these bones and sequencing genetic material and so forth?
I know exactly what you mean.
Yes, due to the fact I agree with historians that contemporary sources are evidence, I say there is evidence.
And I gave you 8 contemporary sources and listed more.
The issue is that you disagree with the scientific community this is valid and are demanding physical evidence.
I’ve told you multiple times no physical evidence exists. It’s an impossible demand, and there’s nothing to show you.
You asked if I had any other evidence but what i gave you or if we were done here and I said “yes we are done here” because there’s nothing fucking else to give you. Get that through your dumb skull holy shit. How are we this many comments deep into you still not getting there’s no physical evidence and I have never claimed there to be.
If your default position is to disagree with the overwhelming consensus of scientists, but then instead of learning even the slightest about what they’re saying you choose to argue with randos on social media about it you’re just anti intelligence. You’re choosing to be dumber on purpose. I’m not here for that shit.
You might as well argue the earth is flat.
You clearly don’t know what I mean, since I’ve said repeatedly that other people’s claims or beliefs don’t constitute evidence.
I asked for actual evidence. If you have none, you could have said that near the beginning of this conversation rather than whatever you’ve been doing.
You also clearly don’t know what I mean since you’ve been attributing random meanings to me that have been wrong every time. I don’t have nefarious purposes, I actually just want the actual evidence you claimed to have, and I don’t put stock in people’s stories, because people are often mistaken for many reasons. For evidence to be taken seriously , it should not rely on subjective accounts.
So it sounds like you don’t have evidence, you have stories.
I know exactly what you mean. 100% crystal clear.
You asked for physical evidence.
Once I realized you had a radically strict criteria for what types of evidence could be considered “actual evidence” far and beyond what the most serious scholars and historians would apply, I did say that.
https://lemmy.ml/comment/18918021
Right here I said we were done and I had nothing more I could give you.
I gave you the evidence I claimed to have.
You want evidence I never claimed to have, but which you mistakenly think I did.
Are you sure?
Earlier you told me we know Australopithecus existed because we found their bones.
I believe some scientist may have found a bone, but why do you accept its as old as they say it is, why do you accept it belonged to a distinct species called Australopithecus? Where’s the physical evidence of that?
In between the Australopithecus and the homo sapien there are quite a few missing links that need stories to fill them in.
Maybe they migrated this way in this period? Maybe the water was lower and there was an ice bridge here? Maybe this was a distinct species and not a direct ancestor?
These are all stories aren’t they, opinions of archaeologists and paleontologists and biologists?
Why do you consider finding a weird looking bone evidence of Australopithecus if you don’t follow the subjective accounts of evolutionary scientists and archaeologists when they’re dating these bones and sequencing genetic material and so forth?