There was no condescending attitude, and if you think there was you clearly didn't understand what I said the first time. It's obvious that both of your replies are filled with anger and being totally defensive.
Again I did not inform you of my opinion, thus showing again that you clearly didn't understand what I said. I was informing you of FACTS, the FACTS are that eyewitness testimony is junk, there's no opinion there, just facts.
Actually I learned about the fallibility of human memory with experience, not just book learning. We did an experiment in PSY101 where we watched a video of a car accident and answered some questions about it. One of the questions asked if the truck in the accident had a gun rack, 39 of the 44 people in the class answered either yes or no to that question (I answered yes)... there was no truck in the accident, there was no truck on screen at any point in the video, and yet 39 people's memory of what they'd just seen minute earlier were altered by that one question. Experience.