> He honestly weighs evidence he's never seen? I don't think he is: rather, he's point out the failure of the debunkers to make a sound argument against someth

> He honestly weighs evidence he's never seen? I don't think he is: rather, he's point out the failure of the debunkers to make a sound argument against something which he's not seen. I think that his position is, 'I have not seen levitation, but others say they have,' not 'levitation exists.'