> Do you have the data, the calculation of this arc, and the review of this method or not I don't, and neither do you. But appeals to ignorance are a well-kno

> Do you have the data, the calculation of this arc, and the review of this method or not I don't, and neither do you. But appeals to ignorance are a well-known logical fallacy. My point (which you missed), is that it is entirely reasonable to think that the search is difficult, with a small chance of success. You don't argue with my points, because you can't. They're all 100% true, and you know it. Instead, you play the conspiracy thinking game of pushing false doubts into the narrative. > Do you think its strange that all the debris has washed up on the opposite side of the Indian ocean to this arc? i.e. you're entirely unaware as to how oceans work. This is normal for oceans. So you deny reality, and instead pretend to be skeptical by raising irrelevant details. No, you're not smarter than everyone else. No, there is no conspiracy to hide the evidence.