Testimony is Evidence

[Ravenshire]

None of that makes "witness testimony" evidence.  You;re looking for a solution as to when or if you accept witness testimony, but regardless of when or if you do or what line you draw it will still just be you -accepting- witness testimony.  

It is not transformed, by your acceptance of it, into evidence.  It is still entirely unlike those other reps of the set we've been discussing and which we call "evidence".  It still makes nothing of it's contents -evident-.  You can accept that I had a cheeseburger, or not...but neither my claim that I did nor your acceptance or rejection of my claim provides -evidence- of whether or not I had a cheeseburger.  It doesn't even provide evidence that -I- believe I had a cheeseburger (even if you accept my "witness testimony", and so you do believe).......it doesn't even provide evidence that cheeseburgers exist.........

That's a mighty fucking fail for something you accept as evidence.  But hey, you do you.

GB stated unequivocally in the post I was responding to that witness testimony is evidence--therefore I was not arguing that dead horse.

Please quit mis-representing my stance.  I said it was acceptable as evidence, in support of physical evidence.