3 ms·
Without a conclusive study, the only proven conclusion is that "large amounts of cash are sometimes seized, sometimes not". However, a study could reveal that t
by beart 8y ago
Without a conclusive study, the only proven conclusion is that "large amounts of cash are sometimes seized, sometimes not". However, a study could reveal that this happens very typically, or not very typically (for some definition of typical). In either case, that is not proving a negative.
- topmonk 8y agoThat's exactly my point. Stating that seizure is 'very typical' as fact, and if someone says you have no evidence, the retort shouldn't be "Prove it isn't."
- lostcolony 8y agoNo one said I had no evidence (the original statement for this subthread wasn't mine), and my retort wasn't "prove it isn't", but "your supplied anecdotal data is not actually helpful". I totally agree the original post to this subthread supplied no data. That's obvious. But to counter it with badly qualified anecdotal evidence does nothing to actually counter it.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]