Comment by lwhalen

You're parsing semantics rather than engaging with the core point. When I say something "can be dismissed," I mean that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. The burden of proof lies with those making supernatural claims, not with those rejecting them. You seem to be suggesting there's some deep irony or inconsistency in my position, but pointing out logical flaws in religious reasoning isn't the same as making unsupported assertions about the supernatural. And yes, I consciously chose to focus on the most relevant parts of your argument rather than chase every tangential point.