>>213822900
>admits his position is oxymoronic and logically inconsistent
>has the gall to claim I've erred in my estimation
The issue at hand is not whether or not you believe a deity exists and I've never claimed otherwise. In fact, in my example of extra-terrestrials, I pointed out that it's completely irrelevant. The issue at hand is the inconsistency of applied logic to reach your conclusions. You claim lack of knowledge based upon the idea that absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence, but use lack of evidence to support your lack of belief and hedge your bets with mights and maybes. It's logically inconsistent and why you're ranked lower than agnostic theists who hold logically consistent beliefs.
