It's characteristic of believers in conspiracy theories to dismiss critics of the theory as not looking at the evidence presented or of being "too insecure and afraid" not to believe the generally accepted explanation. But that is an ad hominem attack geared to undercut what the critics have to say.

This argument cuts both ways, Don, with both the official and non official conspiracy theories. And you are just as guilty of these things as those you oppose. Your arguments are no more sound than any of the ones you say you don't accept. So there really is no reason to be making judgements about and ridiculing the people who accept a different version of events than the one you accept.


I'm sorry, you are saying it is "credible" but the sources I am seeing posted by Froth have not shown any evidence that can be proven.   

Ron, none of the official versions of events can be proven either, but that doesn't seem to stop you from believing them. On the other hand, the experts who have come out against the official conspiracy theory are using sound scientific principles (laws of nature and physics), to back up their claims, while those who are promoting the official conspiracy theory are not.