Preponderance of evidence for the "resurrection?"

[Zzyzx]

.
From another thread:

I, in opposition to your opinion, would argue that the preponderance of the evidence would suggest the truth of the resurrection, for example.

We are probably all aware that there are stories about a dead body coming back to life after days in the grave – stories written by promoters of a religious splinter group – decades or generations after the supposed event. The identity of the writers is not known to Christian scholars and theologians. None are known to have witnessed the events they write about. Their sources of information are unknown. The stories differ from one another. None have been verified as being truthful and accurate.

Unverified stores by four salesmen touting their product can hardly be considered "preponderance of evidence" so there must be strong evidence elsewhere. Right?

What is the other confirming evidence?

[Tired of the Nonsense]

[Replying to Divine Insight]

OReilly has stated in the "Sun Stood Still?" thread: "it remains true that no experiment or observation has ever absolutely proved the Earth moves at all." In other words OReilly has argued strongly that the very science which allows for the existence of this forum that he is arguing on, the very science that allows for operating smart phones, internet connected tablets, computers in general, not to mention robots on Mars... in other words all of modern technology, is so fundamentally flawed that it hasn't even established something as fundamental to the laws of physics as the fact that the Earth moves. OReilly also considers the story of a flying reanimated corpse to be as reasonable and well established an "event" as any other event in history, despite the fact that not a single other commonly accepted event in history is predicated on the complete violation of all experience, observation and the laws of physics. A better way of looking at it might be the question, "Which is the most OBVIOUSLY true, modern working technology, or an ancient claim of the imminent return of a man from the dead which in point of fact has an actual track record of ZERO FOR 2,000 YEARS!" The position that OReilly has taken, so obviously anti-knowledge and pro make believe, in other words counter to all accumulated knowledge that has allowed for WORKING TECHNOLOGY, is a perfect example of why the rift between deeply committed religious believers and those who no longer subscribe to a religious belief is widening. Studies show that the number of Americans who hold no particular religious affiliation, known as "Nones," currently stands at about 20% of the population, up 5% in just THE LAST FIVE YEARS. The complete and obvious disconnect between unrealistic ancient supernatural beliefs and modern science and the ACTUAL working technology it provides is inexorably exposing religion as the "total baloney" that it always was.