Anecdotal Evidence

[robvalue]

I want to make another point about attempts to drag scientific evidence down to the level of anecdotes.

"You're relying on the word of scientists".

Yes, this is often the case. But I'm relying on them to report something that is falsifiable. That's the difference.

Consider these two scenarios:

"Everyone who has been there agrees that there is a pillar, which is 3 metres high."

"Everyone who has been there agrees that there is a spectral pillar there."

The first claim is falsifiable. If it wasn't true, it would just take one person to measure the pillar, or notice that there is no pillar, and the game is up. So the idea that not a single person has tried this, or everyone who has done so has been silenced, is becoming a very unlikely possibility.

However, spectral pillars are unfalsifiable. No one can show it isn't there. No one can show it is there. As such, it's a useless claim to make, and no amount of "evidence" confirms it. Even if lots of people agree, it means nothing, because it cannot ever be tested. No one can simply turn up and "measure" it, like they can in the first scenario. People start using such unreliable methods as "feeling it" or "I experienced it". And as expected, people aren't going to report the same things about this spectral pillar either. How tall is it, I wonder?