AB.
The explanation fails to concede that there could be viable evidence to validate the personal testimony.
What fresh doziness are you attempting now? No fallacies concern themselves with different arguments that could confirm that the fallacy’s conclusion is correct just as a matter of dumb luck.
If I reason that a tossed coin coming up heads four times in a row is more likely than not to come up heads on the fifth toss because it prefers heads you’d be able to spot the flaw in my reasoning. If separate “viable evidence” then came to light that it was a rigged coin though that would mean my conclusion was correct,
but my justifying reasoning for it was still false nonetheless.
Can you see why?
Oh, and when you posted the Youtube links you committed the anecdotal fallacy in any case because you expected me to take their claims seriously with no additional viable evidence of any sort. Repeating
what they said and ignoring their (absence of) justifications for
why they said it was schoolboy error stuff.