Is witness testimony really to be never taken seriously? Ever?

The claims appear to be fairly standard nonsense that’s been circulating for decades.So, before we get to his credentials the question is, what does he claim to have actually witnessed? For all the article tells me he could just be parroting claims he’s read in books or in the internet.There are obvious financial gains to be made, too.As well as the fact that the Russians have been known to spread UFO disinformation.

quote:

---

Reading about this made me realize something. I've been told all my adult life that human testimony is the most unreliable form of evidence in science and logic. Is this really written in stone? Will credentials and a lifetime of achievements count for nothing at all?

---

Nobody says that credentials count for nothing, but they really don’t count for enough to make this believable. The plausibility is very low. We don’t know where he got this information from (although we can guess, and it’s not from anywhere credible). We don’t have any corroborating evidence that’s worth anything. So you’d have to be pretty gullible to just believe it on the basis of credentials.

Well I’m talking about the UFO nonsense.The report on seeing women or a woman suggests that something happened there, but there isn’t enough to say what it was. Which is not nearly enough to convince me that there was anything supernatural going on.

The DebriefSo, not an eye-witness. No information learned in the course of his work. Just repeating the usual bullshit. Exactly as I thought.