Eyewitnesses

Red McWilliams smacks down another stab at defending the Bibles contradictions....

Alright, I'm tired of this crap. The old "eyewitnesses to a car accident" defense of the incongruous Easter stories. Have you seen just how conflicting the gospels are? If I were investigating an incident and got 4 "eyewitness"** accounts that were that contradictory, I would think that something much more nefarious was going on and the eyewitnesses were in on it.

Basically the gospel accounts of Easter, translated to your multiple eyewitnesses to a car accident idea, would go like this:
One person says two cars were involved, one says there were three, the other two both say there were five.
None agree on the color of the cars. Who was driving, how many and who the passengers were don't jive either.
They don't agree on who had a green light and who had a red. Two say there were no lights, it was a four way stop while another says there was a cop directing traffic (who can't be found now).
Two say there were no other witnesses. One says there was a handful and the other says it was during rush hour and hundreds saw it (though none of them filed reports).
Two accounts say both drivers called their parents, while the others say they called their insurance agent. No accounts make mention of any other calls made.

Now someone else comes along, reads all those reports, and tells you what really happened AND YOU BELIEVE HIM??!!