rationalskepticism.org

Pebble wrote:

Thomas Eshuis wrote:

Pebble wrote:

Thomas Eshuis wrote:
Since the topic is about theism, atheism and science it's perfectly on topic to point out that your signature is counterfactual claim.

But since PK does not rely on facts or logic for his/her claims, what is the issue?

The issue is that in science, the burden proof lies with the claimant, so where it concerns the question of (a)theism, the burden of proof lies with theists. And not as PK's signature asserts, atheists.

Yes, but where has PK shown any signs of being interested in science? Ignorance combined with certainty is all I see.