It’s an issue of credibility of the witness, not scientific verifiability.
I disagree completely.
Why should your testimony of your experiences not be compelling evidence?
Because people lie ALL THE TIME.
And? It’s still not a scientific issue. People lie, yes. So they are not credible. Not to you, anyway. That doesn’t make the only evidence acceptable of the scientific sort. And it doesn’t make the position opposing testimony “fact”.
You have to decide who you believe and why. You can’t recreate everything in this life in a lab, and you can’t assume the things you yourself can’t reproduce didn’t or can’t happen, nor claim that assumption is fact.