Anecdotal Evidence

[RoadRunner79]

I haven't had a chance to watch the video, but my guess would be about a half hour to 1 hour later (for the second plane at the trade center).   I have never denied many of the things in such articles, and think that they should be considered when looking at testimony.  Most of them, are about the ability to pick someone out of a line up, interrogator contamination and that memory is not like a video tape (hope they didn't spend too much money figuring out that one).  However in a number of times asking, I haven't had anyone discuss anything about the particulars in those studies (I'm starting to think, that people didn't read past the titles, or give it any thought).   How do we apply them to witness testimony?  Also, I'm curious, how many people remember the second tower being brought down by a car bomb that day?

Well, I'll summarize what the video points out about the collapse of the second tower. Most people were glued to the coverage of the 9/11 attacks and will swear (myself included) seeing the second tower collapse an hour or two after the first. It is, with the exception of some of the people living in and around Manhattan, an impossibility. There was no footage broadcast of the second collapse until the next day. Millions upon millions of people believe, very clearly, something that could not have happened. This is just one of the weaknesses of testimonial evidence. I urge you to watch the video. It's truly frightening what can get someone convicted.

Interesting.... according to Wikipedia, the second tower collapsed at 10:59AM.... News coverage was still on going at this time.   Did he mean, that the entirety of the collapse was not caught on camera?   There also sites which states that it is he, who is incorrect in his facts such as here.  https://www.metabunk.org/ted-talk-when-a...rong.t780/  That he is confusing the first tower being hit, with the second tower falling.  

It also appears that yet again, an anecdote is being attempted to be used as evidence against anecdotes as evidence.

Just to clarify, I do think that there are some interesting stories, of alien abductions.  I have never checked into them very much.   I did recently read a book "Lights in the Sky and Little Green Men" by Hugh Ross.  I think that there was times in the book where he tried to stretch things a little to far; but, there was some accounts which may supply a little evidence.  However being skeptical, doesn't mean that I don't accept testimony, on such cases, but that I think critically about it and don't take things for granted.  I don't just dismiss them as false, before I even look at the evidence (that is pseudo-skepticism).

This quote seems that you believe that myself and the others here have never taken a real look at the evidences for god(s). I can't speak for everyone, but I think I speak for most that we have. Most of us were believers at some point (or at least wanted very badly to believe) but the evidence simply never bore out the claims.

I think that you are switching topics here.... but it does appear, that you are at least warming up to testimony as evidence.