Not as long as the conspiracists continue (with the help of so many people like many of those on this thread) to marginalize, ridicule, demonize, and suppress any investigations and investigators other than their own.

This is a non-sequitur, beardedbruce, as well as a straw man, and ad hominem argumentation.

First of all, not all people who challenge the official version are conspiracists. To call them that shows that you do not support independent investigations, because you appear to be defining anyone who supports having independent investigations a 'conspiracist'. Secondly, not all people who support independent investigations are engaging in marginalizing, ridiculing, and/or demonizing anyone at all. Many are simply challenging the official version of events. Thirdly, the even those who are doing those things are not in any kind of position of power, so whatever damage they might be able to do is miniscule in comparison to the problems that are caused by the government of the most powerful country in the world engaging in those kinds of behavior.

You seem to think (this observation is based on years of reading your posts) that you can reverse the roles in every kind of debate and come up with a point that makes some kind of sense. You really can't always do that. Sometimes reversal of an argument just isn't logical.

You don't have to prove the validity of any alternative scenario or theory in order to disprove an existing theory. So proving to you how it might have been done is not a prerequisite for disproving the conspiracists' version of how it was done.

Yes, well, what I have been doing is questioning the official version of events. I haven't tried to prove any of the alternative theories. At this point, I would be happy just to see serious investigation about how the official version is not possible.