Christian apologist and former cold case detective Jay Warner Wallace says it's important for

theists to understand circumstantial evidence, which is when an observation or argument supports

a conclusion not directly, but by way of an additional logical inference. Wallace notes that

it's rare and sometimes even impossible to have direct evidence of events in the distant past,

and that circumstantial evidence can be just as relevant and just as powerful as direct evidence of events in the distant past, and that circumstantial

evidence can be just as relevant and just as powerful as direct evidence.

And he's right, as long as that inferential link can be established.

As atheists, we're often accused of dismissing evidence for the existence of a God without

even considering it.

But before making that accusation, ask yourself, have you established the inference

that connects your evidence to your conclusion? If you can't justify that inference, then you don't

have evidence and you just have a claim and you should be dismissed. But if you can justify that

inference, that means you're right. You do have evidence for your God. And if you're right,

we want to hear it because we want to be right

too. So here's your big chance to make your case because the show is starting right now.

Yes, yes. We do want to be right also. And that is why that was an amazing, amazing intro. Thank you, Scott Dickey.

For joining me today. Everybody, thank you for tuning in. This is Talk Heathen. Today is Sunday, June 30th, and we are live.

I am Jimmy Jr. your host, again, the great Scott Dickie is with me, the world renowned mathematician.

I don't know if he's world renowned. Yeah, but he's definitely ACA renowned. And dude,

I'm renowned in my own mind. Well, you know, I love working with you and I'm so glad to have

you here today. Folks, today is, well, I already said the date, but this is talking that a product of

the atheist community of Boston. We are a 501c3 nonprofit organization dedicated to the promotion

...