Absence of evidence

[Steve Thomas]

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Somebody smarter than I am said that once.

Stating that no one has stepped forward in 50 years claiming they saw something, is not proof that it didn't happen.

 

Steve Thomas

[Thomas Graves]

1 hour ago, Steve Thomas said:

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Somebody smarter than I am said that once.

Stating that no one has stepped forward in 50 years claiming they saw something, is not proof that it didn't happen.

 

Steve Thomas

 

But neither does it necessarily mean that the absence of cold, hard evidence regarding whatever "probably" or "must have happened."

Unless, of course, there's an overwhelming amount a preponderance of properly-analysed-and-applied "circumstantial" evidence.

Agreed?

 

--  TG

 

 

Edited April 2, 2018 by Thomas Graves

[Michael Clark]

47 minutes ago, Thomas Graves said:

 

But neither does it necessarily mean that the absence of cold, hard evidence regarding whatever "probably" or "must have happened."

Unless, of course, there's an overwhelming amount of properly analysed and properly applied "circumstantial" evidence.

Agreed?

 

--  TG

 

 

Tommy, I have been waiting for you to finish editing your response. It is making less sense with each edit.

[Thomas Graves]

33 minutes ago, Michael Clark said:

Tommy, I have been waiting for you to finish editing your response. It is making less sense with each edit.

 

How so, Michael?

(Thanks for waiting, by the way.  I hope it wasn't too nerve wracking for you.)

--  "Tommy"

 

Edited April 2, 2018 by Thomas Graves