"Bob White" wrote in message news:BJTSa.101044$OZ2.20188@rwcrnsc54...

[snip]

That what does not exist? Define your term. So far none of you
true-believers has ever presented anything for consideration, nor specified
anything meaningful, verifiable to search for.

To search for? You mean, you can't find something without knowing what
it is?

The proposition in question is that an invisible something (still
essentially undefined) may in reality exist, knucklehead. "There is no such
thing" never stands in need of proof, since the burden of proof cannot be
shifted. I'm sure you know this principle of valid argument (logic) by now.

You can stop any time your fallacy of trying to shift the burden of proof to
the non-believers. The non-believers have nothing (no thing) to prove,
knucklehead.

What prevents us from using the logical, systematic, scientific method of
investigation to investigate any proposition at all, even a proposition
like, "It is true that a magic invisible creator of everything might really
exist"?

I already gave you one obstacle that would prevent you from you from
using the scientific method; the object of your investigation has to
be accessible. Now, I will further illustrate the futility of your
proposal.

Our Universe contains matter and energy. Some of this matter is barely
detectable to us. Neutrinos are just one of these ghostly particles.
Every day, many billions of neutrinos pass through your body, without
a trace. But, neutrinos are not the most difficult particles to
detect. There are particles of strange matter that may amount to
several tons of mass, but which can pass completely through Earth
almost as easily as neutrinos.

But now suppose that there are still more exotic objects out there,
such as matter that cannot interact either electromagnetically
(similar to neutrons) or through the interactions with which we are
familiar. Indeed, suppose there is another state of being that is
neither matter nor energy. The Universe could be filled with objects
that we cannot detect, because they don't interact with matter.

The scientific method cannot examine objects that it cannot detect.

We have an ongoing scientific investigation of the theory that ETs (not in
evidence) might really exist. Here is how that theory is being investigated,
using the scientific method:

No, what you present is the logical theorum that you are testing. That
does not tell us how you will actually detect these ETs. Failing
detection, you cannot begin your analysis.

But, what are you looking for? You never defined what attributes ET
has that you can observe. An electromagnetic signal? It would be a
shame if they aren't producing one. A spectral fingerprint of complex
organic compounds? Too bad if ET isn't organic.

If ET is not accessible, if he is not detectable by you, then your
science cannot begin to analyze him.

[snip]