TV’s Frink said:
How about no one until we have proof?
You’ve missed the point.
It’s like the two doors puzzle, where one door always tells the truth, and the other door always tells lies. Except both doors always tell lies.
if that were the case, I would just have to believe the opposite of what either tells me.
I think Frink’s point was drama for drama’s sake, or something to that effect (maybe). Which person is to be believed is irrelevant because neither one is credible enough to warrant believing. Whether one or the other is telling the truth speaks nothing to their current credibility.
I think. I don’t really care who they are nor do I have any interest in who is credible or why anyone ought to take sides.