• GamingChairModel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      hace 6 meses

      Yes, but an absence of a proof of the positive is itself not proof of the negative, so if we’re in the unprovable unknown, we’re still back at the point that you can’t prove a negative.

      • AndrewZabar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        hace 6 meses

        Well, if the conditions are such that the positive would be absolutely certain to leave evidence, then the lack of said evidence is good enough. Like, I say it’s not snowing where I live. Absolutely nobody in my town sees so much as a single snowflake. Also, it’s 72° out. Haven’t I proven to a reasonable degree that it’s not snowing where I live?

      • frightful_hobgoblin@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        hace 6 meses

        we’re still back at the point that you can’t prove a negative.

        We were never at the point that you can’t prove a negative. That’s dumb & wrong.

        A woman menstruating proves negative on pregnancy.

        The existence of the largest prime was disproven thousands of years ago.