It has been suggested that an alternate opinion against some conspiracy theories and claims means a person has no credibility. At best that is a profoundly circular argument, at worst downright stupid. It disposes of debate in favour of outright claims, even though those claims are not only NOT proven, but have alternative explanations and ones that fit available evidence. So, to put this claim of credibility into perspective, how come these outright lies and clearly obvious deception NOT classed in a much more serious manner!! Here are some clear examples of this:- [video=youtube;d0OS26q20R0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0OS26q20R0[/video] [video=youtube;vawJhSnFcQ0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vawJhSnFcQ0[/video] [video=youtube;jrU5qp9lmJg]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jrU5qp9lmJg[/video] [video=youtube;79UAhuN6VPA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79UAhuN6VPA[/video] So "truther", how about HIS credibility! I guarantee the serial forum spammer will not answer this properly. Maybe it's a "moot" point that his main film maker is a deceptiove S.O.B.