jesus could not have existed, page-4

The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. The fact is that few records survive for thousands of years. There are a number of ancient writings that have been lost, including 50% of the Roman historian Tacitus’ works, all of the writings of Thallus and Asclepiades of Mendes. In fact, Herod the Great’s secretary named Nicolas of Damascus wrote a Universal History of Roman history which comprised nearly 144 books and none of them have survived.3 So there is no reason based on the absence of other texts to doubt the existence of Jesus of Nazareth.

But whatever, pointless argument is pointless, here's some copy-pasta of you're really interested.

http://www.amazon.com/Historical-Jesus-Ancient-Evidence-Christ/dp/0899007325

http://www.str.org/articles/did-jesus-really-exist

"We have good, historical reasons to think Jesus was not just a legendary character.
Because of the historical evidence of Jesus’ existence available to us today (biblical and non-biblical), there are very few scholars who attempt to argue that Jesus never lived.[1] How do we know that Jesus was not simply a legendary character created decades later? Consider these bits of evidence:....."