Sentences with phrase «lack of evidence does»

Willingham and others acknowledge that lack of evidence doesn't constitute definitive proof of nonexistence.

But this lack of evidence does not prevent NCTQ from confidently declaring that they know what teacher prep programs should be doing and judging them on that basis.

Lack of evidence doesn't mean something is false.

«The lack of evidence does not mean that water birds are not responsible for the dispersal,» says Dr. Philipp E. Hirsch from the University of Basel.

News that the police have dropped their inquiry into the Falkirk selection because of a lack of evidence does not come as a surprise to me.

Also, lack of evidence DOES NOT equal evidence of a god.

Lack of evidence does not prove a negative.

Not exact matches

Ever when faced with overwhelming evidence that major changes are needed, most companies are slow to take action and lack the sense of urgency required to get things done.

I don't have a ton of empirical evidence for that last point, other than the fact that hedge fund managers get paid a lot, and there is therefore no obvious lack of incentives to manage a hedge fund.

Dawkins argues that while there appear to be plenty of individuals that would place themselves as «1» due to the strictness of religious doctrine against doubt, most atheists do not consider themselves «7» because atheism arises from a lack of evidence and evidence can always change a thinking person's mind.

Non-believers don't believe because of the utter lack of any evidence to support the claim.

You make the claim that there is a god, I say I don't accept your claim due to the lack of evidence provided... seems to me the one making the claim is the one who needs to provide the evidence.

I can infer that he does not exist based on lack of evidence.

So you make your point just don't pretend that you are above being pigeon holed or committed to a belief due to lack of evidence.

How does the lack of evidence with Noah's Ark, the birth of Christ, the creation story and so forth actually prove that there is no God who wants us to rely on faith instead of assured knowledge.

Complete lack of proof that something exists is evidence that it does not exist.

A silly example might be that because we don't see evidence of aliens on earth, they must have all left because the lack of alien evidence proves they were once here but must have left long ago.

How does the lack of understanding provide evidence either way?

I don't have a belief on the situation one way or the other, my grounding in the question of any God or gods comes from the lack of evidence for or against.

And yet the intent of the ceremony, in making the union of the couple part of a wider commitment involving family and the community, is often abandoned, as evidenced by the typical bridal couple's excuse for a lack of consideration for the wishes and comfort of relatives and other guests: «Well, it's our wedding, so we get to do whatever we want.»

I do agree however, that the stunning lack of evidence to support a god makes it at least, «fantastically unlikely» that there is one, but I'm fine leaving it at that.

I admire your unflinching courage to consider the lack of evidence and do away with your useless faith.

Lacking any evidence none of these exist I draw the obvious conclusion that they don't exist.

The claims that God doesn't want to be «readily known» and carefully avoids providing evidence of his existence were contrived to explain the lack of evidence.

They just don't believe in their worldview and think they are a little deluded, which is fair considering the extreme lack of evidence.

While he probably committed manslaughter, the lack of independent evidence does mean that he should be acquitted under the American system of law.

You still fail to address the fact that this «belief» is merely a lack of belief in your god after examining the evidence and therefore does not represent an ideology in and of itself.

The complete and total lack of any and all evidence that something exists is itself very very strong evidence that it does not exist.

Once you get through the deception and their crazy no - fact doctrine based on book where it's history has been proven false due to the lack of DNA and Archeological evidence that does not support the BOOK OF MORMON, I am glad this guy was intelligent enough to leavof DNA and Archeological evidence that does not support the BOOK OF MORMON, I am glad this guy was intelligent enough to leavOF MORMON, I am glad this guy was intelligent enough to leave.

Showing that a God did it would require its own evidence, not a lack on behalf of science.

An agnostic does not believe in a creator because there is no proof, but they also do not completely dismiss the idea of creation due to the same lack of evidence in denial.

He is FULLY God and FUULY man... second... don't project yourself on me... to you it seems lack of evidence..

I don't believe in any god due to the complete lack of evidence for any of them.

Don't believe me, simply scan some of the postings above and you can easily spot an aethist's post, they're generally mean and sarcastic and clear evidence what the lack of Biblical principles will «evolve» a person into.

The main - stream atheist does not believe in the existence of deities (most likely because, as the one responder said, for lack of evidence).

In Santa We Trust didn't say he / she had all the information, just a lack of evidence.

Don't bother trying «Vector particles» and all that... that's another terrible theory that has been postulated to support the lack of evidence.

I run into a variant myself: I can not even remotely imagine how people can actually believe in whatever god they do, despite a total lack of evidence in that belief, and then conform their lives to it.

Bostontola — I don't know if you are new to CNN, buddy, but ATHEISTS Paint all people of a religious group with a broad brush is worse than lack of forgiveness, it aims to convict people with no evidence much like racism.

Robert, your god does not exist and your lack of evidence is disturbingly familiar.

Don't you think it's time to maybe consider the possibility that the lack of evidence indicates a lack of supernatural superpower?

There are only so many ways you can try to explain that a lack of disproof does not equal proof, nor even evidence.

Seems to me we have a double standard here — you asked for proof that god does not exist, and we (multiple people) accommodated you within the bounds of logic and evidence (lack thereof), but you have not (can not!)

@ Moby, If you don't believe in angels based on the evidence or the lack thereof that's fine, but if you're claiming that the nonexistence of angels to be the absolute truth then you better provide the proof.

We happen to value honesty enough to say we do not believe in your god due to an overwhelming lack of evidence that such a being even exists in the first place.

This means that we readily admit that we don't know for sure, but in light of the total lack of evidence we simply can't believe in a supernatural god.

Given current lack of evidence for proof of anything supernatural, will there be leniency for those who simply and honestly claim, «I don't know», granted there is a supernatural, and that the Christian God is the true God who did present us with an ultimatum to accept him or not, expecting us to wage the eternal fate of our soul?

I am not an agnostic because I don't think it's very honest when faced with the lack of evidence for God to say «Well both sides of the debate are at a stand still!

to J.W. and fred — i think its rather silly to argue anything as fact if its cleary thought based (i.e. lacking proof / evidence) when asked about the where did we come from or how the universe (whatever) i always answer with i don't know, but then i pose an idea — i state openly thats its only an idea... if any one of you religions folks would simple agree to the FACT that what you BELIEVE is real is REALLY only an idea until proven (much like evolution) then i would find much more pleasing conversations beyond the realm of atheists... but alas, i am still waiting — i found some but most are imovible in there beliefs that god is real, provable, and most def.

but i didn't state anything example — i stated that the theory of evolution is yet to be proved and so with that i agree that due to that lacking it is equal to the theory of god... the only thing i said which is cemented truth for anything is that we don't know what the real answer is... and by stating ideas as facts serves no real purpose but a selfish one... lets call it an ease - ment on the inner self, the mind can now be at peace with the hope that when i die i get to live yet again... full belief in this is insane without evidence.