Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Any general statement is like a check drawn on a bank. Its value depends on what is there to meet it.
When someone makes a claim against the state, that person must legally verify that the facts in the claim are true.
I think I have been very conscious throughout my career. I can't go back and remember every line of every ad I have done, but I think in the most part I have been pretty conscious that we are not making a wrong claim. I am pretty confident with everything I do.
If you say your product is the best, back that up.
Forgotten were the elementary rules of logic, that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and that what can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence.
Over and over, expanding scientific knowledge has shown religious claims to be false.
I don't want to sound callous. I mean, even if I have nothing to offer, that doesn't matter, because that still doesn't mean that what anybody else has to offer therefore has to be true.
… scientists are required to back up their claims not with private feelings but with publicly checkable evidence. Their experiments must have rigorous controls to eliminate spurious effects.
What establishes [for Gen Z] the relevance of a claim isn't some established notion of authority. It's the social signals they get from their peers.
