":::You grossly misrepresented the Duncan source. The next word after the part you quote is ""However...."" and the conclusion of the article is that arguments from silence (AFS) have value. The article states that the claims of fallacy assume the AFS is intended as a proof, but no historical argumnet is intended as a proof. This is the third time I've caught you misrepresenting sources and/or adding sources you haven't actually read.   

"