It's this lack of follow through which burns me in regard to these investigations. > The two Chinese ransom notes differ substantially from other notes in cont

It's this lack of follow through which burns me in regard to these investigations. > The two Chinese ransom notes differ substantially from other notes in content, format, and tone. Google Translate fails in both Chinese-English and English-Chinese tests, producing inaccurate results that suggests the Chinese text was likely not have been similarly generated by the English text. Really? Did Flashpoint even compare English to Chinese samples from the many professional human-based translation services online or was Google Translate their sole source of testing? > Perhaps most compelling, the Chinese note contains substantial content not present in any other version of the note, is lengthier, and differs slightly in format. Hmm. That again suggests it may have been interpreted by a human. Although why immediately assume it's one of the authors? A human-based translation service could yield the same results...