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.
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.