(December 9, 2012 at 9:02 pm)Darkstar Wrote: I just rejected you answer. You say that eyewitnesses are not reliable because they might not actually be eyewitnesses, and we shouldn't take their word for it because that would be hearsay.If we can't trust modern historians then how can we trust ancient nobodies?
[quote Al-Fatihah]Yet if asked how you know that these historians were eyewitnesses, your answer is "because they said so", thus you debunked yourself again. For it still relies on hearsay that the eyewitness were actually eyewitness.
[/quote]
Response: To the contrary, I never stated that eyewitnees are not reliable, nor can you quote and prove otherwise, thus the weak strawman fails again.
You can trust historians with proof that they are historians from an eyewitness account of evidence. But claiming that a historian is a historian because you heard so is not an eyewitness account. Debunked again.
