You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
0

[–] GhostshipResearch ago 

You remain challenged to provide data or a source to support your assertion.

The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children receives advertisements with the very least amount of case information possible.

How, then, could they be supplying criminals with anything?

The children are already missing. The public is asked to call the police if they see these children.

The only one's that could possibly be aided by this are the missing children.

I'm not the "One True Expert"; there are a great many like me. You just aren't one of them. No big deal. If you want to "investigate" without the benefit of the knowledge subject matter experts have, you can attempt that as well. Although that's like attempting to diagnose and repair a car's engine without the benefit of a mechanic or a manual.

But if you're going to criticize and cast aspersions on a system that exists to save lives every day, your accusations should at least make sense, if not also be supported by independently verifiable sources of fact.

0
0

[–] Infopractical ago 

"You remain challenged to provide data or a source to support your assertion."

My assertion was a thought experiment, not a data claim.

You seem very vested in your claim. I expect that you will continue to write walls and walls of words about it. Good work so far.

0
0

[–] GhostshipResearch ago 

I request that you read and follow the rules for posting in this thread.

Assertions require supporting documentation.

Speculation, submitted as such, require consideration and are either dismissed as unfounded or non-relevant unless facts can be found to support it.

If you have no facts and dismiss the contribution of those who demonstrate the submission's irrelevancy, it's not helpful. Thus "thought experiments" that have no basis in fact detract from the pizzagate investigate, while doing nothing to advance it.