Christians. Could you be wrong?

[FatAndFaithless]

And I posted a link showing why it should be treated skeptically.

I must of missed it, care to post it again?

As for your reliance upon eyewitness testimony, simply because it is sometimes admissible in court doesn't mean that it is accepted over other, more comprehensive forms of evidence; indeed, that was my point, which you chose to ignore.

If we were talking about just one person, I would agree. But 3 or more people all with the same testimony, is pretty compelling evidence.

I believe the point that Thump was making is that regardless of whether or not testimony is admissible in court, that's not how science works. Testimony and anecdote are not data, and when trying to determine whether or not something is factually true, testimony doesn't mean a damn thing, the evidence is what's important. The multiple of anecdote is still anecdote, and it isn't evidence or data.