Not that you haven’t had this explained to you repeatedly, but… thats not how the burden of proof works.
Example:
If I say “zephyreks is an unrepentant kisser of billionaire toes,” then I should be the one to provide proof of toe kissing. It’s not on you to prove that you don’t kiss billionaire toes.
In the article, the author makes a claim. They do not back up the claim with evidence. They dong do so, they should expect to be criticized for it.
That’s not how the burden of proof goes. The article is making a claim. It’s on the article’s authors to prove it.
Again, if you have such a strong argument, why don’t you use it?
The person is saying the article doesn’t prove their claim at all; they’re not necessarily saying the article is wrong
Not that you haven’t had this explained to you repeatedly, but… thats not how the burden of proof works.
Example:
If I say “zephyreks is an unrepentant kisser of billionaire toes,” then I should be the one to provide proof of toe kissing. It’s not on you to prove that you don’t kiss billionaire toes.
In the article, the author makes a claim. They do not back up the claim with evidence. They dong do so, they should expect to be criticized for it.