Luckily nobody is equating scientific literature with “mere claims”
You have been when you claim that they are testimonies.
accordign to chat gpt
The statement "A testimony is a claim without evidence" is not entirely accurate. While a testimony can be a form of claim, it doesn't necessarily imply a lack of evidence. Testimony often refers to the statement or declaration made by a witness under oath, and it can be supported by evidence such as personal observation, experience, or other forms of documentation.
Even within the scope of this definition, a testimony does not rise to the level of a scientific report. Sorry.
However, it's essential to recognize that testimonies alone may not always constitute sufficient evidence to prove a claim beyond a reasonable doubt, especially in legal contexts where corroboration and other forms of evidence may be required for validation. Nevertheless, testimonies can still hold significant value in various situations, particularly when they align with other evidence or provide unique perspectives.
I don't recall that anyone has dismissed testimonies as useless. Just that scientific papers are not testimonies.
So ether CHAT GPT is also part of this massive pro creationsits conspiracy………. Or maybe (just maybe) you are wrong, maybe testimony doesn’t necessarily implies “without evidence” According to the common usage of this word
I don't think you and one or two others counts as a massive conspiracy. But I like your grit.
I'm not wrong. A testimony is a claim without evidence used as evidence. There may be other facts brought in to support the testimonial claim, but they don't ride along with it naturally.
Maybe you are wrong. But I don't see you considering that possibility.
Regardless of your reply…………… do you understand that I am more likely to trust Chat GPT as a source than random people from forums with a clear bias for disagreeing just for the sake of disagreeing and with clear bias to defend each other, even when they are obviously wrong?
And being one of those random people on a forum and one with a posting history I am aware of, where do think I rank the quality of your posts?
I disagree that anyone has disregarded what you claim. In fact, regard for what you post has been the focus of this thread for several pages.
This just sounds like more sour grapes to me.
For the sake of this thread I will follow @It Aint Necessarily advise use the Word claim instead of testimony , but I am far form convinced that testimony implies “without evidence” and zero supporting evidence has been provided for such a claim
You do what you feel you need to do and continue reading. I would improve the breadth and depth of my sources were I in your position. But that is me.
I saw an alien eat a baby. What is it that makes this testimony a fact for you?
How about this testimony? I saw a woman invent the cotton gin.
Or this testimony? I saw a stork deliver a baby to my neighbor's house.
Or this testimony? I saw that minister shoplifting. It wasn't my friend that shoplifted.
Why are these facts to you? What evidence is delivered in those statements?
I've even written them here, so they are documented. I could repeat them in a court of law so they are in the court records. Does that make them less claim and more fact?