The failure (and even unwillingness) to disprove another’s assertion is not a valid argument nor proof of the veracity of the assertion. The burden of proof is always on those who make the assertion or claim. This is especially so when an idea or phenomena is unsupported or is not (all too often) falsifiable.
If a fan of political candidate X says that candidate X would make a great elected official, the proper response is: why? The rejoinder ought to be a reasonable listing of candidate X’s qualifications, ideas, and general experience – particularly on weighty or important issues of public concern. If the reply is simply, prove to me he would not be great in office and if you can’t then that, in and of itself, demonstrates he should be elected. Of course, this is totally nonsensical and you ought not not take the person seriously. However, if you stop and think about it such rationalization occurs all-too-frequently.
The road to tyranny over of the mind and body of man is paved with such nonsense disguised as serious argument – fallacious as it is at its core. Those that employ it are tyrants and power-lusters of the worst sort. Moreover, those that accept it have simply abandoned their mind. My view is that as a rational being you have a duty, not a fleeting choice or whim, to not accept ideas if the best or only argument for them is premised upon the inability to disprove that which is unproven.
Facts, reason, and proof-not faith or flights of fantasy-are the source of all that is true.
Ask why, and demand proof whenever and wherever you’re suspicious!!
POS MMXII 
