Talk:How do you know? Were you there?

"How do you know?" isn't part of the escape hatch
"How do you know?" is seen, from the content of the article, a substitute of "Were you there?" rather a part of the escape hatch. Should this warrant rename? User:K61824User_talk:K61824 16:46, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
 * To what? I don't follow how it isn't an example of an escape hatch argument, or what beingpart of an escape hatch would mean.  17:35, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
 * The escape hatch is "Were you there?" in order to discredit the person presenting the facts about ancient things. in the section "Dear Emma B", "How do you know?" seems to be a substitute that will lead to more informative conversations, and as such are not the escape hatch.  User:K61824User_talk:K61824 18:39, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
 * This is true, but the question as asked is pretty much in the form given in the title - David Gerard (talk) 17:00, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

AIG response
There's actually an even better response than given in this section. You merely respond "Ahh. So you have an actual witness who was there. Ok, produce this witness. Summon up your God. I'll believe whatever he tells me, personally.
 * Biblesayso. Scarlet A.pngd hominem 10:54, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

BLABLABLA I CANT HEAR YOU
Put your fingers in your ears and yell out "BLABLABLA I CANT HEAR YOU" every time somebody tries to explain anything or say anything logical and reasonable to you. That is kind of what Right wing bible thumping Christians do. Sophie Wilder  22:27, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

2 Peter
Some context for the quote from 2 Peter (KJV): "2 That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour: 3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, 4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation. 5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:"

This seems to putting the words "as they were from the beginning" into to mouths of the "scoffers". It is not an endorsement by the author of 2 Peter. TomS TDotO (talk) 13:22, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Everyone has their own opinions and thank you for expressing yours. Believers pick and choose how they want to interoperate things all the time.  That cherry picked section is one used often to justify creationism and global warming denialism (thank you senator Inhofe).  If you don't like us doing it then maybe you should stop people from using that rather than their critics for pointing out how gobsmakkingly stupid it is.  -EmeraldCityWanderer (talk) 14:07, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Reversing the question
Ask 'daft questions' to which 'were you there' can be added until you get bored: 'Where were your parents married?', 'You say your car was serviced at X garage...', 'You say this ready-meal was safely prepared' etc (variant on Aristophanes' The Frogs' oil bottle quote-insert). Anna Livia (talk) 10:35, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

The fact that this is an type of appeal to ignorance fallacy should be added to this article
It is appeal to ignorance because it is used by creationists to say that creationism is true because you don't know it's false (since you weren't there). 149.19.33.89 (talk) 01:03, 1 December 2022 (UTC)