Dear Rich

Oh dear clearly someone doesn't understand the burden of proof.

Let me put it in the language of statistics: the null hypothesis is that adding women to the economy will have no effect on GDP growth. You add women to the economy. There is insufficient evidence to reject the null in favour of an alternative. The null stands.

They are not filled with fallacies. You see fallacies where none exist due to your cognitive bias.

History is not science. Hypotheses are not testable in a lab. However again with vaccines if you look at the graphs of diseases and when the vaccines were introduced you will see there is insufficent evidence to reject the null. This coupled with the fact that vaccines continue to be unable to cure or prevent common infections like cold virus does not present a strong case for the alternative.