The following passage is from the book as follows:
<<Copyrighted source: THE RATIONAL OPTIMIST. Copyright © 2010 by Matt Ridley. >>
Perhaps. Remember how few are the remains from Neanderthal sites. But at least the burden of proof has shifted a bit. Even if the habit is more ancient, it may have been the predisposing factor that then conditioned the African race to the whole notion of specialisation and exchange.
In this text I’m not sure the meaning of ‘the burden of proof has shifted a bit.’
I googled out and I found the appropriate sentence as follows:
▪ But now the burden of proof has shifted to us: we're presumed guilty, and we have to spend time and money defending ourselves.
When I compare the sentence in question with the latter sentence, I think I find out what I cannot figure out in the former, that is, I am not sure where the burden of proof shifted to.
Can you tell me where the burden of proof shifted to a bit?
And if I just totally wrong in my train of thought, what is it that I made a mistake about?
Thank you in advance
<<Copyrighted source: THE RATIONAL OPTIMIST. Copyright © 2010 by Matt Ridley. >>
Perhaps. Remember how few are the remains from Neanderthal sites. But at least the burden of proof has shifted a bit. Even if the habit is more ancient, it may have been the predisposing factor that then conditioned the African race to the whole notion of specialisation and exchange.
In this text I’m not sure the meaning of ‘the burden of proof has shifted a bit.’
I googled out and I found the appropriate sentence as follows:
▪ But now the burden of proof has shifted to us: we're presumed guilty, and we have to spend time and money defending ourselves.
When I compare the sentence in question with the latter sentence, I think I find out what I cannot figure out in the former, that is, I am not sure where the burden of proof shifted to.
Can you tell me where the burden of proof shifted to a bit?
And if I just totally wrong in my train of thought, what is it that I made a mistake about?
Thank you in advance