To "Debunkers" show me proof of Alexander the Great

well I was just thinking of the position of the skeptic can be taken about anything really. A blind Skeptic could take the position that vision is a complete fallacy or a drunk person could argue with passion that 561*6 is 7452. what i'm saying i guess is that were greatly gifted but even more limited. All that has been proven is just convincing those who the information is relevant to that it is true.

So maybe next time don't call someone an idiot or explain to them, because scientifically nothing is repeatable in an experiment if you go down to the level of the atoms and beyond, and no one can prove that JFK or Bush or Alexander ever existed because you never met them and probably never will, but then again i could be wrong.

are you saying that any position can be argued so all arguments become irrelevant because truth is only what a particular person believes in and is subjective?

reply to post by leomurray


Are you forgetting there are plenty of people alive today who have seen JFK with their own eyes? Why bring up people in our recent history who many have obviously met or seen in person and know exist. Is this another one of those posts by someone who is irritated by skeptics who claim Jesus’ existence is nothing but hearsay; because it kind of seems like that, I apologize in advance if I am wrong.

reply to post by leomurray



can you prove that you actually exist and not a creation of my imagination?

or maybe we are all nothing more than creations of dave rabbits imagination

Stop with the if a tree falls in the wood and no one is around does it make a sound? hypotheses because it will lead to nothing.

there is enough scientific or other reliable proof that things happened.

here is one example

www.britannica.com...

[edit on 16-10-2008 by Grey Magic]