Question for Debate: But what does it mean to say that evidence is "good"?
I propose the following criteria for good evidence that should convince any sensible person that a claim is true:
- â–º The evidence is physical. Example, a live specimen of Bigfoot
â–º The evidence is demonstrable. Example, dropping a pencil and a paperweight from the same height to demonstrate that regardless of weight, objects fall at the same velocity
â–º The evidence is observable. Example, a fossil of an extinct bird held on display in a museum
â–º The evidence is unbiased. Example, a double-blind study of racist attitudes among Hispanics using a questionnaire.
â–º The evidence is accessible to people who have no specialized training. Example, observing the position of the moon
â–º The evidence is not controversial. Example, the fact that smoking causes illness
â–º The evidence is unambiguous (there is only one meaning). Example, the length of a bridge
â–º The evidence is derived from a known source. Example, a document signed by Gerald Ford
- â–º The evidence is nonphysical. Example, a purported ghost haunting a mansion
â–º The evidence is biased. Example, a Fox editorial crediting President Trump for low unemployment
â–º The evidence is accessible only to people who have specialized training. Example, dating the Shroud of Turin
â–º The evidence is controversial. Example, the assassination of JFK instigated by a conspiracy