If evidence of something isn't available to you, then you don't have evidence of it.

This should be obvious and is true by definition.

Someone claiming they have or saw evidence of something, isn't itself evidence of anything: it is a claim.

You believing the claim doesn't make it evidence for the thing they are claiming.

For example nobody in the public actually has any evidence supporting any of the extraordinary claims about Cmdr Fravor's encounter in 2004.

One example of such a claim is that the object in the encounter "moved 80000ft in under one second".

Zero actual evidence of this claim is available to the public. What is available, is Kevin Day claiming it.

Could Mr Day have been mistaken in his conclusion about what he thinks he saw? Could he be lying outright? Absolutely maybe. Those are real possibilities that haven't been ruled out: saying "I can't believe he could be wrong or lying" doesn't rule those possibilities out.

But is he ACTUALLY lying or wrong? I have no idea. The absolute god's-honest truth is that no evidence is available to us to evaluate the truth or accuracy of what he said. Anyone telling you otherwise is lying.

And if some other party claims to have secret access to the evidence, and/or claims to have evaluated it to mean a certain thing... Those are more claims and it doesn't solve the problem of lack of evidence.

Please discuss.

Submitted April 03, 2022 at 03:24AM by TTVBlueGlass https://ift.tt/TSp6E7W