Evidence to Convict?

[LadyForCamus]

Those concerning testimony. As we have been discussing.

You JUST said, two posts up, that you aren't making an argument for testimony, lol.  See, this is why you get constantly strawmanned.

[Ravenshire]

Going to ignore this forever RR?

Something else has occurred to me as well. DNA testing has resulted in hundreds (at least) of overturned convictions, just in the last couple decades. How many for eye-witness testimony? Googling it gets you plenty of eyewitness misidentification and little else. See here.

Your "case" is falling apart RR. It's not because we're atheists and want to deny your gawd through denial of testimony. It's because eyewitness testimony by itself sucks huge monkey balls.

It wasn't really pertinent to the topic at hand...so I let it go.
I'd be happy to discuss, if you want to start a thread.

You introduced it. You made it pertinent. I don't blame you for wanting it to go away though...

[RoadRunner79]

Also.... I think I'm misunderstanding something in your previous posts.... I haven't been talking about the Bible as evidence or not. So I'm not sure what that was about..may have read your post too quickly.

[Ravenshire]

How's this for pertinent RR?

When they charge the jury in cases that include eyewitness testimony, they must inform the jury of potential problems with such accounts.

Source

[RoadRunner79]

How's this for pertinent RR?

When they charge the jury in cases that include eyewitness testimony, they must inform the jury of potential problems with such accounts.

Source

Don't disagree.... if you want create a thread, and we can discuss.
Start fresh, and discuss the reasons for what we think.

[Amarok]

Shifting the burden of proof required. But we are getting off topic.... I'm more concerned with the general principles, befor discussing special cases.

I have no idea what you mean here.

---

Let's try this another way.  What if, hypothetically, we all came together in agreement that eye-witness testimony can be considered evidence.  Where does the dialogue go from there?

We could discuss ways in which testimony may be contaminated, limits of testimony, or other aspects in more detail.i would probably stop there though, and let you to re-assess things. Ideologies don't just change instantly. However I haven't even been really making an argument for testimony.  

Hopefully at least, people would quit saying testimony is not evidence, and we wouldn't need to go back to this.

See, this is where I start to sense you are being disingenuous despite your multiple protestations.  Which ideology is it, exactly, that you feel "we" need to reassess?  I'm really trying to give you the benefit of the doubt here.
[/quote]

You'll generally come to that conclusion when you deal with Road . Astute observation

[Ravenshire]

How's this for pertinent RR?


Source

Don't disagree.... if you want create a thread, and we can discuss.

Now you're just being obstinate. This goes to the very heart of what you're claiming in this thread, yet you want me to make another.

[LadyForCamus]

But remember, he doesn't want to talk about the value of testimony as it pertains to God claims even though he, himself, has as much as stated that biblical testimony should be considered evidence, because for some reason that he hasn't explained yet, that would be "shifting the goal posts."

No, RR, is called discussing the subject honestly.

You brought it up... I gave a quick answer, but I'm not looking into changing the topic to extraordinary claims. We have a thread for that. I, trying to not change topics.

Well, then I'm sorry but, I have no earthly idea what you want to discuss,
or why.  I mean, how can we be shifting goal posts if, according to you, we aren't debating anything?  You wanted to talk about testimony as evidence, but you don't seem to want to actually talk about it.

---

Don't disagree.... if you want create a thread, and we can discuss.

Now you're just being obstinate. This goes to the very heart of what you're claiming in this thread, yet you want me to make another.

This is what he does when he gets cornered.  He spins his wheels and pretends to be obtuse.  I can't believe I fell for it AGAIN. Honestly, mental illness is the only explanation for why a person would waste this much of their own time and energy being insincere.

[RoadRunner79]

As stated before, the purpose of this thread, wasn't to debate the issue, but to understand what others believe.
If some one want to discuss to debate the issue, then that is a different topic. At first, I didn't want to turn this thread into a debate. But even if it is winding down, I think it would be best to start fresh, and not in the middle. If someone is so interested enough, then create a thread.

My guess is no one will.... but that won't prevent them from making it about me....avoiding discussion. (And if I don't happen to notice the creation of the other thread, put a link here)

[Amarok]

You brought it up... I gave a quick answer, but I'm not looking into changing the topic to extraordinary claims. We have a thread for that. I, trying to not change topics.

Well, then I'm sorry but, I have no earthly idea what you want to discuss,
or why.  I mean, how can we be shifting goal posts if, according to you, we aren't debating anything?  You wanted to talk about testimony as evidence, but you don't seem to want to actually talk about it.

---

Now you're just being obstinate. This goes to the very heart of what you're claiming in this thread, yet you want me to make another.

This is what he does when he gets cornered.  He spins his wheels and pretends to be obtuse.  I can't believe I fell for it AGAIN.  Honestly, mental illness is the only explanation for why a person would waste this much of their own time and energy being insincere.

Don't beat yourself up to much .