Why eyewitness testimony isn't reliable ....

Originally posted by googlefudge

Does that about cover it?

No.

It does not really matter if the claim is ordinary or extraordinary.

Wrong. The amount and quality of evidence for a claim required to justify belief in that claim
is proportionate both to how important it is that you be right, and how probable that claim
is a priori.
Extraordinary ...[text shortened]... reliable and convincing. [assuming that this
evidence is sufficiently reliable and convincing]

1. It appears to be up to each of us to determine if a claim is ordinary or extraordinary.

2. It appears to be up to each of us to determine the reliability of the testimony of an eyewitness.

3. It appears to be up to each of us to determine if the evidence is sufficiently good.

Therefore, I have determined that Yahshua, a.k.a. Jesus the Christ, was whipped and beatened severely, forced to carry a cross beam, had thorns pushed into His head, was crucified on a cross and pierced in the side with a Roman spear to determine that He was really dead. Then He was buried in an expensive linen shroud that was covered with flowers and spices and was raised from the dead after three days and came out of the tomb and appeared to many eyewitnesses just as the Holy Bible records.

Even though this may be an extraordinary claim, there is just too much eyewitness testimony and reliable evidence for me to deny the claim. The empty tomb, the Shroud of Turin, and the Sudarium of Oviedo are still available today as direct credible evidence.

HalleluYah !!! Praise the LORD! Holy! Holy! Holy!

Originally posted by RJHinds
1. It appears to be up to each of us to determine if a claim is ordinary or extraordinary.

2. It appears to be up to each of us to determine the reliability of the testimony of an eyewitness.

3. It appears to be up to each of us to determine if the evidence is sufficiently good.

Therefore, I have determined that Yahshua, a.k.a. Jesus the Christ, w ...[text shortened]... vailable today as direct credible evidence.

HalleluYah !!! Praise the LORD! Holy! Holy! Holy!

1. It appears to be up to each of us to determine if a claim is ordinary or extraordinary.

No. This can and must be determined objectively.
An ordinary claim is a claim about something common and probable, things we observe and experience
all the time, and don't violate what we know about how the universe works.
An extraordinary claim is one that is very rare or unheard-of, improbable, and possibly also violates known
laws of science.

2. It appears to be up to each of us to determine the reliability of the testimony of an eyewitness.

No. There are no special witnesses. People are all varying degrees of unreliable witnesses.
We are not all the same, but we are all varying degrees of bad and unreliable.

3. It appears to be up to each of us to determine if the evidence is sufficiently good.

No. Again there are and must be objective standards for evidence.

In this case the objective test for evidence is to do a Bayesian calculation to determine how a piece of
evidence shifts the probabilities of various explanations [claims] proposed to explain that evidence.