Thanks for doing the needed follow-up post, Don.....I was too pooped to type today. (we've been **car shopping** arrrgghhh)

"Circumstantial" needs to be understood.....and what constitutes 'convincing' evidence can be distorted easily. "Guest" certainly does like to suggest a notion of "open mind" that differs from mine. The way he does it, it feels more like "gullible".

It is NOT that these theories need to be accepted unless we can roundly disprove them, but rather that, given their nature, they need to be considered suspect, unless they are supported by more than half-truths, insinuations and subjective linking.

As I said in another place, there are folks who get paid to trace down these issues.....I'm not one.