No. That's not how it works. It's like saying that you have to prove that god doesn't exist.
The fact is that what they said all of those years is that he left. So it is up to you to prove that he was expelled. That's how things work in real life.
How about we reach the point where we don't compare the existence of a mythical creature to this situation? Spiritual things are completely different animals.
Yes, you were riding on the uncertainty of whether Jesper was kicked or if he left. I narrowed it down to two possibilities:
1. He was essentially kicked (not necessary in a "you are fired bye" conversation), because of his alcohol issues, and for everything else it indirectly caused.
2. He left himself because of his alcohol issues, and for everything else it indirectly caused.
EIther way, he had to leave because of his alcohol issues, and not because of musical differences.
Here's an example: you and I are married for 10 years now. You don't like the ampunt of time I spend on internet boards and you don't like my taste in animes. But there's this other issue: I'm an alcoholic, and it gets worse and worse. It reaches the point where both of our lives are fucking miserable, because you don't know when you come home if you will find me in my own piss, or I will wait for you with dinner. It gets to the point where 8 out of 10 days I'm bathing in my own piss. You say enough is enough, it's time to get separated.
You may later talk about how you hated the amount of time I spent on the internet, or that you didn't like my taste in animes, but it was not the reason we got separated. Same thing with Jesper talking about musical indifferences. It's absolutely not hard to imagine it existed. The band admitted that Clayman was recorded in a very tense environment, because they (and who knows if they = all of the band, or most of the band but not Jesper) already wanted to switch producers. (please don't make me search for that fucking interview..........)
The reason he left or was kicked was because of his alcoholism.
"Quite a small part" is not remotely the same as "barely". It's the difference between 1/3 of an issue and 0.1/3 - but with English not being your native language maybe I'm being too harsh.
What's weird to me is how angry you get over this whole situation. It's impossible for you to have any kind of sensible debate, you have to get furious, throw around insults, use big, bold letters and underline, and just generally act like a total spoon. It's not good for you bro. To quote a wise man - check yourself before you wreck yourself.
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/quite - used for
emphasis
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/barely - by the
smallest amount:
Okay, let's count, with 10/10 being the sole and only reason, and 0/10 being not even related at all.
So barely means by the smallest amount so 1/10 or 2/10 tops.
Small amount means at the very least less then 50%, as if it was 50%, it could not be smaller than the rest of the reasons. So let's put small amount the closest number on X/10 scale that is lower than 5/10, which is 4/10.
Now, quite is used for emphasis, ergo it's strengthening what you just said. Ie. quite stupid could be translated in more simple terms to very stupid. Now, very stupid is more serious, than stupid.
So let's bring down that 4/10 to 3/10.
Okay, let's look at the best scenario for you, which is barely being 1/10 and quite small being 3/10. Is there a difference unless you are a math-nazi? Both imply that there were greater or much greater issues. Which is a very interesting notion, given how:
- he couldn't tour, because he was drunk
- Anders saying he had to leave because of his alcoholism
- Resistance guy talking about his shitty experience with Jesper and his drunk side - even if he still loves him, cuz Jesper is a cool fella when he is sober
