Well, first off, I already pointed out that you have no empirical evidence supporting the claim you made above, but, interestingly enough, you start requiring it here, of your opponents' point of view. Very interesting... but not very consistent.
Second, you can't actually have empirical evidence on torture unless you actually have a significant history of having used torture, and, as such, there are so many flaws in this line of thinking, I'm not even gunna start down that path. It's like the Lernaean Hydra.
Third, anecdotal evidence suggests that torture is a less effective means of getting information from suspects than more conventional means, in more normal circumstances (i.e., not those of a ticking time bomb scenario). But, as you have probably already realized, these anecdotes are more-or-less irrelevant to the parameter I laid out : a ticking time bomb scenario.