Testimony is Evidence

[RoadRunner79]

You could just as easily have said that Judas was the real hero or something like that. Either way it's not like I've never been a complete ass so I cannot fault you too much for using hyperbole now and then. You're one of my favorite members and I hate to see you start treating believers with contempt like so many do. Roadrunner has been taking the high road on this one.

(bold mine)
High horse, you mean.  RR keeps insisting that he's just interested in the idea of testimonial in general, and that he is definitely NOT talking about religious ideas.  However, based on how the thread has unfolded, I find this so highly implausible that I've openly declared I that I believe him to be lying.  

What specifically on how the thread has unfolded (from me)  makes you think that this is highly implausible to the point where you think I'm lying?   Personally, I think that for many of the atheist who keep trying to force the conversation to be about God, and are so concerned with unspoken motivation; shows that they are more focused and influenced by this than I.  

Why do we not have several examples of testimony to examine and consider?  Anyone with a general interest in jurisprudence would produce some typical examples: identifying people in a lineup, for example, or dependence on potentially unreliable "expert" witnesses; in a matter of a minute, I could probably produce a list of 10 or 20 examples worth discussion.  I've just scrolled through 20 pages of this thread, and found a conspicuous absence of testimonial cases whose evidentiary value we are to consider.  

It's like I made a thread about the value of cars, but carefully refrained from ever mentioning any actual cars.  Why would I do that?

If you want to talk about the value of eye witness testimony.  It has value in that apart from many other forms of evidence (except for maybe video or audio recording), it can tell you a lot more about what happened, not just the results.  Testimony can tell you what was said or what lead up to the event in question.  It can tell you if it was self defense, or who instigated things.  If other people witnessed the event, or where involved.  It can point you to other evidence, that you did not know about, and can tell you about what happened elsewhere. It can tell you why there is particular physical evidence present which may point you in the wrong direction. It tells you about things that did not leave any physical evidence. Basically, it may give you a more complete picture, than indirect evidence alone and the inferences that may follow.