The analogy is mildly interesting, but a little facile to me sorry. Get Lion IRC to claim that all deities are basically the same, and that he is a deist and not a monotheist, then we can take his claim from there, but it is a little facile to pretend a generic term like alien abductions is remotely comparable with one person using unevidenced subjective personal experience to claim they know Jesus is real, and another that Thor is real.

Though I grant you that Jesus and Thor are to all intents and purposes the same, at least in the sense they are both claimed to be deities, and not accurately defined with evidence for that definition, and of course in the fact that no objective evidence can be demonstrated for either. A more accurate comparisons for me is that one is claiming personal experience evidences alien abductions, while the other that personal experience evidences garden fairies, as they're both supernatural, and Lion IRC is claiming these somehow corroborate each other, but refusing to believe in all such claims bar one. Then hilariously suggesting that because his personal experiences involve using his senses, and so does scientific method, this somehow makes his unevidenced claims comparable to scientific facts, which can be objectively evidenced, are falsifiable, and when tested must produce identical results.

Lion's claim is too too hilarious...sorry. A better comparison is this, my senses experienced a unicorn, scientists use their senses, therefore it is scientifically valid that unicorns exist.

Now.. explain why, if his claim is valid, that one is not? Or have we scientifically evidenced unicorns, or at least the "evidence" for them is on a par with scientific facts. Which is Lion's rationale here.

So I'm afraid, Lion's claim is risible nonsense.