For me evidence that is most convincing is expert testimony and pictures. I like expert testimony because I like  hearing evidence from a person because it makes me feel like i can trust what they are saying and it keeps me engaged rather then looking at random numbers that i don’t understand.( However i do know for some people this is the most effective way) But the reason i like expert testimony rather then a regular narrative is because in a expert testimony the person is an expert in the field relating to the controversy not just a random person with there own personal opinions. I also think that pictures can be very effective. For me personally they are good because i am a visual learner so a picture really helps me see whats happening. I espeacsilly liked the pictures in the “connecting the city” video because they showed evidence of what the streets and bike lanes how they are now. However they also added  to the images what they expect it to look like with  the new added bike ways.  I also feel like people use personal experiences as there own evidence to evaluate problems. For me i noticed that i used my own personal experiences when evaluating the debate on the panhandle bike ways. I feel like the bike lane that is already in the panhandle is very safe and good for biking. I feel like after observing the cars on fell that road is mostly used for commuting so if you take away a lane to add a bike lane it could cause a lot of traffic.  I feel that because of my own experiences they should leave the panhandle the way it is and not add another bike way when they have a perfectly good one right there!