No, videos are not inherently evidence nor do they contain evidence. Videos can present evidence but said evidence will have other sources, so to insist that the evidence is only in a video is the same thing as saying you have no evidence.
This is why we often refuse to acknowledge claims of evidence contained in a video without even bothering to watch said video, if evidence was presented in the video you could link it elsewhere. The best source for evidence is scientific papers, unlike the video these papers show their work and how they tested said evidence as well as the results of said test.
To make the evidence empirical, when these tests are repeated the results must be identical, there is no room for interpretation. If none of the tests produce the exact same results then it is not evidence.
The tests must always be exactly the same as well, any variation in the test invalidates that test and thus the results are meaningless. The results must be recorded as well, accurately and verifiably, so claims of said test producing such results are invalid without this verified record.
Videos can be evidence of events, but they must be actual recordings of said events and unaltered. The video must then be verified by several sources and it must be clear.
So no, we do not have to watch your religious videos to know that it's just a bunch of claims and double speak, if you had evidence you'd link a scientific paper when asked for it.
No comments:
Post a Comment