[TrebleRebel]

What I've been saying for years was recently confirmed in a scientific report written by a top FBI scientist.

That report references an article in Science magazine as it's source. It does NOT give any data, nor does it reference insiders. As it stands, the FBI paper is quite meaningless.

[jpl]

That report references an article in Science magazine as it's source. It does NOT give any data, nor does it reference insiders. As it stands, the FBI paper is quite meaningless.

Not to mention that the FBI refused to make this Douglas Beecher chap available to the press to answer questions, and more importantly, they have also refused on multiple occasions now to answer questions that members of Congress have (in classified briefings no less).

It almost gives one the impression that they've got something to hide.

[EdLake]

As it stands, the FBI paper is quite meaningless.

Only to those who ignore facts in order to promote some kind of conspiracy theory.

Ed