“there are certain accepted words and their definitions that accompany them”
We’re not talking semantics, here. “You can’t prove a negative” is a cliche, and cliches may or may not he true. Either way, it has nothing to do with the accepted definitions of the words. Not everyone believes you can’t prove a negative, for the obvious reason that some you can prove, and easily.
There must be some truth to a cliche for it to catch on, and so it is with this one. But only a certain kind of negative is impossible to prove, and the literal meaning of Bible verses versus science isn’t one of them (depending on how you want to interpret “literal”). I find it the height of irony that the very phrase itself, “you can’t prove a negative,” is a negative. You can’t prove that you can’t prove a negative, if you take your assertion at face value. So why would you believe in your own dictum?
In closing I’ll quickly work out a syllogism to demonstrate the fallacy of nonproof of negatives. Imagine you are picked up by the police for shoplifting. They tell you where and when you were supposed to have committed this crime, and say the security footage can’t positively id the suspect, so they want to know if you have an alibi. You say you were across town in a different store at that time, and low and behold the cameras there got a good look at you. You are free to go.
Why? How does this work logically? Well, all you have to do is introduce a simple truism to demonstrate the alibi excludes the possibility of you having shoplifted:
Major premise
You were in store A at 7:00
Minor premise
A person cannot occupy two physical spaces at the same time
Conclusion
You could not have robbed store B across town at 7:00
Try this one.
Prove that you and the world didn’t just come into existence, say 30 minutes ago, fully formed with memories and the material that surrounds you.
Unfortunately, this is where modern or Pop science is heading.
There has been a concerted effort to move reality into the “Meta-state”.