I tried looking some up, but then realized the onus of proof is on the person making claims, not on people who are skeptical of people who make claims.
There's not an onus of proof on someone who says the sky is blue or water is wet. We need a certain foundation of understanding to have productive conversations.
And we all have stuff to do. Suffice it to say, there is plenty of supporting evidence for the claims.
> Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith.