I’d appreciate not being expected to think of your personal experiences as objective fact for everyone to take seriously.
People can take my testimony or opinions however they choose. That isn’t to say that your position is objective, or fact by default, just because I can’t scientifically prove mine.
It’s an issue of credibility of the witness, not scientific verifiability.
I doubt very seriously that anyone, including you, would find a statement from me saying “Ghosts are real, I’ve had experiences that prove it beyond a shadow of a doubt, I just can’t reproduce those experiences . . .” to be all that compelling.
Case in point. Why should your testimony of your experiences not be compelling evidence? Just because I can’t recreate it in a lab doesn’t make it not valid testimony.