"Alekhine" wrote:

"Lovino_V" wrote:

who realy knows.... its not like evidence is helping eather side...

What?

The lack of evidence from people who think he's real is enough to say, practically speaking, that he isn't real. At all. 

there is no evidence like i said, or did you missread.... the otherside has to get evidence to prove its wrong also thats how sience works...... so i said who knows...

---

has to get evidence to prove its wrong also thats how sience works

You are incredibly unaware of how science works. You cannot prove a negative. The burden of proof is on the one making the claim that something exists.

Look up Russell's Teapot. 

---

I Don't Know But Im Going For Yes...
Seriously I Saw Him
And Caught Him On Tape
But Could Not Get
Home.And Then
Smashed ## ###
By Seeing Him
I Went Home
A Slept For 3 Hours..

---

"Alekhine" wrote:

has to get evidence to prove its wrong also thats how sience works

You are incredibly unaware of how science works. You cannot prove a negative. The burden of proof is on the one making the claim that something exists.

Look up Russell's Teapot. 

ahhh but you cant just say "he is not real because i know he is not" can you? get were im comeing at? besides isent it a bit strange to start an argument over a myth? considering the question was asking if he is real or not.  I said "who knows" so it souldent bother you considering im not saying yes or no.

---

ahhh but you cant just say "he is not real because i know he is not" can you?

Obviously not, and I'm not even doing that.

get were im comeing at?

Unfortunately

besides isent it a bit strange to start an argument over a myth?

No

 I said "who knows" so it souldent bother you considering im not saying yes or no.

I don't care about your "who knows" answer. What I care about is your blatant disregard for actually knowing what science is and trying to pass yourself off as someone who has even the most remote idea of what it is. By saying that there is no evidence to "help either side" when only one side has something to prove, you've made it very clear that you don't really understand argumentation. 

---

Not to scare anyone but I am going to just jump in and SCARE ya. To tell you the truth I think slenderman is not real just because that in his back story nothing in the back story seems to ever happen to anyone. Just to say that if you think that Slenderman's real I have to say you do need proof.

---

"Alekhine" wrote:

ahhh but you cant just say "he is not real because i know he is not" can you?

Obviously not, and I'm not even doing that.

get were im comeing at?

Unfortunately

besides isent it a bit strange to start an argument over a myth?

No

 I said "who knows" so it souldent bother you considering im not saying yes or no.

I don't care about your "who knows" answer. What I care about is your blatant disregard for actually knowing what science is and trying to pass yourself off as someone who has even the most remote idea of what it is. By saying that there is no evidence to "help either side" when only one side has something to prove, you've made it very clear that you don't really understand argumentation. 

you know with you.... im not surprized why that bugs you.... if you havent noticed i dont care anymore..... oh and that was an example the "he is not real" thing... i dont reacal saying you did that.

---

you know with you.... im not surprized why that bugs you.... if you havent noticed i dont care anymore..... oh and that was an example the "he is not real" thing... i dont reacal saying you did that.

"DAMAGE CONTROL DAMAGE CONTROL!"

Come on bro.

---

HE IS IVE SEEN HIM

---

no..?

---