FYI

This is very true. And it reminds me of one of my pet peeves - when people say you need to prove something as true.

Actually,  scientifically,  one cannot prove that something is,  only that something is not.  A famous example is that of spontaneous generation. The theory was thought to be "proven" correct, but in 1859 or so, Louis Pasteur proved that spontaneous generation cannot and does not occur. Because of our ever-expanding knowledge, no matter how much supporting evidence one may show for a theory, one cannot know if our understanding is complete and accurate unless the theory is absolutely proven as false. Thus, the burden of proof lies with those who argue the nonexistence or inaccuracy of an object or theory.

(Of course, we Christians know infallibly that God does exist. I am speaking in general terms.)

This is similar to the idea of "innocent until proven guilty." An individual who is on trial must be viewed as innocent (positive/true) unless proven beyond a doubt as guilty (negative/false).

Anyway, let it be known that it frustrates me when people say they have "proven" something. Um, no, you have found supporting evidence.

Kind of similar to when people say that something causes something else, like eating beets makes you turn pink. But that's a story for another day...