You don't do logic do you.
You do not understand logic, basic logic, and yet you claim you cannot possibly under any circumstances be wrong.
I have never known anyone claim infallibilty, it's bonkers to do so.
You must know everything to know you cannot be wrong.
Do you claim to know everything, surely not.
You do not understand the NPF for a start.
I think you are confusing thinking that something is right with infallibility, the state of never being wrong here.
The elephant in the room are the claim that we can never know whether there is a God and that no one knows whether there is a God. How is that established?
Whether you have to prove something is a different thing from whether you can prove something. I have said I cannot prove my correctness but that may be because I do not have the skills. Your assertion that we can assume the non existence of something until it can be demonstrated is odd since it seems to conjur stuff out of nothing and ignores discovery. This alters the default position and therefore the burden of proof.
I couldn't find any entries for the no proof fallacy on the interweb even on an acronym site. I did find an acronym though which describes the antitheist effort today...................No Pants Friday.
Do you mean the fallacy which states you cant prove it isn't therefore it must be? That is different from a statement that goes you can't prove it is and you can't prove it isn't........which I believe is a definition of unfalsifiability rather than a fallacy.
