The nature of evidence

[Mister Agenda]

Testimony is basically saying something is true. I suppose 'testimony of evidence' is someone saying it is true that there is evidence. Testimony is often acceptable because of Boolean logic: For example, I testify that it is true that I tied my shoes this morning. You'd almost have to be contrarian to reject this testimony out of hand because every part of it is plausible given the available information and the triviality of the claim. Unless I'm a very convincing bot, I exist. Most people have shoes, many shoes have laces, most people can tie their laces, and getting up in the morning, putting on your shoes, and tying your laces is a very common activity.

However, if I testified that after I tied my shoes, I went outside and flew over my house once by flapping my arms before returning gently to earth like a bird; you'd be a fool to believe me without a LOT of strong, verifiable evidence.