I think the difference here is you’re trusting the testimony of known liars who had multiple incentives to lie, but may well have been telling the truth for once, who knows?

I’m pointing out that they’re telling stories, with video footage that can be, and appears to be, faked, and that I don’t trust their stories because they’re known liars.

Am I right? Maybe, maybe not. Are you right? Maybe, maybe not. Are we arguing about stories? Yes.

In any courtroom, the burden of proof is on the claimant. I’m not making a single claim, but rejecting claims. You’re the one forwarding the claims. The burden of proof is on you. My evidence that it’s fake is the same as your evidence that it’s real. Bit of a quandary there, huh?

I think the difference here is you’re trusting the testimony of known liars who had multiple incentives to lie, but may well have been telling the truth for once, who knows?

I’m pointing out that they’re telling stories, with video footage that can be, and appears to be, faked, and that I don’t trust their stories because they’re known liars.

Am I right? Maybe, maybe not. Are you right? Maybe, maybe not. Are we arguing about stories? Yes.

I’m any courtroom, the burden of proof is on the claimant. I’m not making a single claim, but rejecting claims. You’re the one forwarding the claims. The burden of proof is on you. My evidence that it’s fake is the same as your evidence that it’s real. Bit of a quandary there, huh?

I think the difference here is you’re trusting the testimony of known liars who had multiple incentives to lie, but may well have been telling the truth for once, who knows?

I’m pointing out that they’re telling stories, with video footage that can be, and appears to be, faked, and that I don’t trust their stories because they’re known liars.

Am I right? Maybe, maybe not. Are you right? Maybe, maybe not. Are we arguing about stories? Yes.