third was perceived deficiencies in Gherman’s documentary evidence in support of her application. None of these bases can support the finding. The IJ relied on three particular “inconsistencies and lack of detail” with respect to Gherman’s Pentecostal faith: (1) her appearance; (2) the propriety of singing and dancing in the Pentecostal church; and (3) particular details of the Pentecostal faith. Assuming, arguendo, that there is some contradiction between Gherman’s profession to be a devout Pentecostal and her attire, she offered the plausible explanation that her particular church is no longer as strict about such matters. The IJ failed to address this explanation or to explain how the government’s evidence could rebut it. Cf. Zheng v. Ashcroft, 397 F.3d 1139, 1143-44 (9th Cir.2005) (<HOLDING>). “Because an adverse credibility finding is
holding that the ij may not rely on a factually unsupported assertion in a state department report to deem an applicant not credible holding that an ij may not use general information contained in a state department report to discredit specific testimony regarding an applicants personal experience holding that an ij made an explicit credibility when the ij found testimony not credible based on several enumerated inconsistencies holding that a department of defense report was inadmissible holding that an ij failed to make explicit credibility finding when he made passing remark that he disbelieved applicants testimony