Well it is different, I admit. But we could always modify the everyday use of the word "evidence" by calling it "acceptable evidence" or "honest evidence" or "evidence that stands up to scrutiny." Try applying any of those to, say, St Bernadette's claims and see where that gets us. My ball lightning claim isn't acceptable as it stands because no-one corroborated it. That makes my claimed sighting of passing interest only. Honest? How do you know I'm not making the whole thing up? You don't. If you'd known me for years as a man of integrity you might be more confident that I wasn't lying, but you still wouldn't know whether or not I was deluded or whether I dreamt it. Does it stand up to scrutiny? Well if you viewed me as a sober man of integrity you'd be inclined to take me seriously, but you wouldn't exactly stake your life on it, would you? The best you could do is say that the jury's out. And that's the best-case scenario. Of passing interest only. The witness claims to ghosts, fairies, Godly visions and the like that I've heard about seem far more dodgy to me. Ulterior motives abound.