Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence

[Jenny A]

Science is supposed to be objective. The minute you say that one set of data requires more or less scrutiny than another you inject more subjectivity into the results. Nevertheless the most recent psi studies are very robust something ever critics have acknowledged. The early posts might have been true 20 years ago. Today its a different story.

The more outlandish the claim of course the more evidence is required scientifically to verify it.
Say you observe a troop of apes and they act pretty much as apes would, using sticks to extract termites and rocks to crack nuts.
Then imagine you observe a troop of apes and one of them emerges holding what looks like a fully formed slingshot, but one made from things apes could deal with, it looks like the ape made the sling shot. You will need to look into this a lot further to prove the claim that the ape made the sling shot, you would need to discount all possible alternatives because it is an extraordinary claim.

^This^

What this really comes down to is that claims which are contrary to well evidenced long established norms require more evidence to overcome the burden of all that evidence which it contradicts.  We know that people don't rise from the dead.  Therefore a claim that one man (or men since Jesus raised one too) requires enough evidence to overcome the fact that we know from thousands of years of experience that people don't do that.