“What??? A negative can’t be proven.”
You logic makes no sense.
For example if someone claimed you regularly molest little boys, how would you disprove that? All you could do is demand the accuser furnish evidence - but at that point you would have shifted the burden of proof to the accuser, the one saying it DID occur.
Russell's teapot is an analogy, formulated by the philosopher Bertrand Russell (1872–1970), to illustrate that the philosophic burden of proof lies upon a person making unfalsifiable claims, rather than shifting the burden of disproof to others.In other types of questions, such as purely mathematical ones or maybe phenomena which can be mathematically modeled, it is possible to prove a negative. Math is purely abstract and is fundamentally different than proving a negative with respect to tangible events.Russell specifically applied his analogy in the context of religion.[1] He wrote that if he were to assert, without offering proof, that a teapot, too small to be seen by telescopes, orbits the Sun somewhere in space between the Earth and Mars, he could not expect anyone to believe him solely because his assertion could not be proven wrong.