Originally Posted by
Maartenn100
You call an eye witness testimony of many people "woo!-laden anecdotes". That's not only disrespectful, that's also not true. What's wrong by the way with an anecdote?
I want to call it the anecdote fallacy. It's the fallacy wich says: "it's an anecdote, so it must be wrong." Or 'the professor eye witnessed the experiment, so he must be wrong because eye witness testimony is not reliable'". That's a fallacy.
That's not what people are saying. What they are trying to explain to you is that it's the
explanation of that anecdote that is wrong. Just because someone claims they saw the gates of heaven doesn't mean they actually did. What you need to do is show some evidence that what they claim to have experienced is really what happened, and not just a hallucination or dream-like experience caused by lack of oxygen.