prfessor, the problem with your argument is is assumes it only applies one way. That can’t be true. Assuming that hard, physical evidence is required to prove something, then, according to the same rule, lack of hard, physical evidence does not disprove it. In fact, hard, physical evidence is also required to disprove anything (i.e. prove the inverse). Lack of evidence doesn’t actually prove anything, it just makes it unproven.
For the edification of the early posters, although “car” is usually thought to be synonymous will “automobile,” the word has been around a lot longer than they. According to Merriam-Webster: car - 1: a vehicle moving on wheels.
There is some evidence that native Americans had doughnuts prior to occupation by us. So they invented them, or at least did so independently of others. I like this idea. Native Americans (North and South) were very creative with what they ate, drank and smoked. Witness popcorn, chocolate milk, coffee, tobacco…
prfessor, the problem with your argument is is assumes it only applies one way. That can’t be true. Assuming that hard, physical evidence is required to prove something, then, according to the same rule, lack of hard, physical evidence does not disprove it. In fact, hard, physical evidence is also required to disprove anything (i.e. prove the inverse). Lack of evidence doesn’t actually prove anything, it just makes it unproven.