If you spend time chasing something that isn't proven to exist just because nobody can prove it doesn't you're just gonna be running in circles searching for Bigfoot
Just look what was on Hunters Laptop. We didn't see it before it came out but now we have.
That doesn't validate the existence of something else entirely. A drug addict fucking prostitutes is a far cry from a former politician skinning the face of a child. Logically you can prove the existence of anything if your only criteria is that you can't prove it doesn't exist.
With your logic, Bigfoot, Loch Ness Monster, and aliens who live inside the moon also exist beause you cannot prove to me that they don't.
It's not worth considering if that's the only criteria.
I used a double negative. I didn't mean too, fren. My fault.
What I was trying to say is that just because I didn't see it, doesn't mean it isn't real. Which is logically true, while still not proving that it exists.
You haven't seen my house, but here I sit typing to you in my house.
I went looking for it. Lots of places "selling" it for 10-20k. If the general dark net scammers had it, it would out all over the place by now.
That being said, this still doesn't disprove it doesn't exist.
If you spend time chasing something that isn't proven to exist just because nobody can prove it doesn't you're just gonna be running in circles searching for Bigfoot
Didn't spend much time looking for it. I found that it wasn't on the dark web, so I stopped looking.
What I said about it's existence is logically true.
Just look what was on Hunters Laptop. We didn't see it before it came out but now we have.
That doesn't validate the existence of something else entirely. A drug addict fucking prostitutes is a far cry from a former politician skinning the face of a child. Logically you can prove the existence of anything if your only criteria is that you can't prove it doesn't exist.
With your logic, Bigfoot, Loch Ness Monster, and aliens who live inside the moon also exist beause you cannot prove to me that they don't.
It's not worth considering if that's the only criteria.
I used a double negative. I didn't mean too, fren. My fault.
What I was trying to say is that just because I didn't see it, doesn't mean it isn't real. Which is logically true, while still not proving that it exists.
You haven't seen my house, but here I sit typing to you in my house.