Predictable. Your'e doing exactly as I thought. See, this is what I mean when I said that you were just going to declare victory in this argument despite my picking apart your sources, showing how they actually supported my contentions more, and pointed out how debates worked to you. It's okay, if you need to tell yourself that you've won after providing sources that you clearly didn't read or understand because you don't know what you're doing here in order to help yourself sleep tonight, I can understand.
Let me put it this way, if I claim to have had sex with Scarlett Johansson, that would be a claim that people would demand proof for, as it is a pretty steep claim in and of itself. Now let's say to prove this I gave you shytty photoshopped pictures of her and I "having sex" and said that they were decisive proof that I had sex with her. When you point out that the pictures are a bad photo shop job, I then start demanding proof from
you that I
didn't have sex with her, then say that it's conclusive proof that I
did have sex with her when you don't provide proof of that negative claim. That's not proof that I had sex with her, that's just me not coming to grips with reality over losing an argument, much like you're doing right now.
Was that clear enough, or do I need to dumb it down to your reading level?