I find proposing alternative ideas rather futile regardless of evidentiary support and/or reasoning. Mainstream directives too easily nullify testing of a formulated hypotheses. It's the sampling of multiple perspectives that I'd hoped to aquire through intelligent discussion. However, if the idea itself is alternative to a flawed mainstream understanding then it becomes "supernatural and paranormal" rather than a serious topic for discussion.
I became a member here because I associated the name with a less than dogmatic belief of the untested and unfounded mainstream hypotheses. If I cannot present supportive evidence nor aquire thoughtful engagement then I can only assume qualification to be a matter of hierarchy approval. Much the same as it is with archaeological exploration and discovery.
Likely a bit off the posts intended design but any opportunity to slip a personal observation under a nose or two...
One cannot triumph without the aid of adversity.