their entire experimentation and documentation was a bit more than nothing pal

I didnt expand any goalpost, you tied your own aspect to god and created your own goalpost wdym?

and the unicorn statement you have said is not keenly known for unicorns to do so

give me evidence I am not

1. he proved the aether does not exist

2. he proved that maggots didnt sponetaenously generate from meat

3. he proved that cholera wasnt a air borne disease

they have proven negative claims, so why cant you?

any sentient being or beings that created everything

but it would theoretically exist? a record of the entire orbital ring of jupiter that a teapot would inhabit would be a theoretically existing object if it was created

my assumption??? I think you mean your assumption. cause I didnt state God exist

i’ll take any god, any sentient being that created everything

how do you know a sentient being didnt create the mechanisms for why all the tides exists including gravity

when did i state that god exist?

No they were not? they all were meant to prove a negative

and also the logical fallacy of Appeal to Novelty

when did I say god exists??? I merely ask what evidence is there that he didnt??? wtf you mean???

that is theoretically possible, you just have to look around the orbit area of Jupiter and where the teapot will orbit given its mass and weight

because if unicorns do exist than that means virgin maidens can summon them in the forests as that is a aspect of them

so to test that we would need to put a bunch of virgin maidens in the forest and see if they can summon unicorns, if they cant than that means an aspect of unicorns are missing therefore evidence that they do not exist

idk like anyone of them. like any sentient being that created everything ever. Any proof against that

Burden of proof fallacy, I asked the question and him just throwing the question back at me is not a answer

why would I? when you asserted they were naturalistic. I made no such assertions on the topic and merely asked a question. so the burden of proof falls on you

I didnt make any assertion, i asked a question??? so the burden of proof falls to you

also

1. The Michelson-Morley Experiment (1887)

2. Francesco Redi and Spontaneous Generation (1668)

3. John Snow and the Broad Street Cholera Outbreak (1854)

Off the top of my head were experiments made to prove a negative

you theoretically can prove a negative and is not considered a logical fallacy, and I am sure a reasonable and rational being can prove their objective claims with better objective evidence rather than give me nothing

that is Petitio Principii

if the proof is that no Spiritual influence has ever occurred on Earth we would need to give a natural explanation for each and every miracle and spiritual miracle that appeared in human history which would be next to impossible to do

you have replaced my question with a nearly impossible premise with your argument