Like I dunno people who are just capable of a shred of honesty and still have an ounce of dignity and self awareness. Which is getting rarer in this world.
But its like we have a murder scene. We have video of a guy frog marching another dude out of a car with a knife to his back into a building. Ten minutes later the guy comes out covered in blood holding the knife gets in the car, we get his license plate on camera as he's leaving. Police arrive you've got a body with dozens of stab wounds, blood everywhere. Analysis shows the knife the suspect was carrying matches the cuts on the body. The blood is the victim's blood. Wounds on the hands of the suspect are consistent with holding said blade while conducting violent stabbing motions with it.
And so you're like "Well we got this dude" and all the facts corroborate it and the evidence fits and we have expert testimony confirming everything and video evidence and then you have some group of dipshits that are like
"Well but we don't the suspect did the crime, after all, we didn't get it on camera"
"Well that evidence the knife wounds match the knife isn't really real, the analyst doing the analysis is biased they're no angel they've out to get the suspect"
So forth and so on.
Why would anyone take those people seriously?
I think its a waste of time really trying in this environment to change minds. Its a waste of time. I know I did my due diligence. I wasn't biased, I examined the evidence I listened to the testimony, and I find the witnesses who swore under oath credible for the most part minus the one obvious skeeze. All their testimony corroborates and checks out.
There's no reason to take someone credible who starts citing conspiracy theories, pointing to this other guy who was across the street in a motel room at the time claiming well HE could be the killer, and just blatantly dishonestly declaring "This isn't really evidence because I say so" credibly.
Its like I'm not going to bother trying to have a conversation with Ken Ham about evolution because that dude knows the facts he just flat out rejects them, the methodology by which they are arrived at, the entire operating paradigm of logic and reason from which they spring in favor of his beliefs from an old dumb book he likes.
Its a waste of time. There has to be an honest interlocutor interested in facts and who cares about truth to bother in the first place, and in this case, if they were those things, they wouldn't be here making those sorts of arguments in the first place. The sort where you just close your eyes put your fingers in your ears and go LALALA THATS NOT CREDIBLE SHE DIDNT SAY WHAT SHE SAID HE DIDNT DO WHAT HE DID LIVE IN FRONT OF A LARGE AUDIENCE ALL OF WHOM AGREE IN THEIR TESTIMONIES BLAH BLAH BLAH
Its childish and a waste of all our time.