Although I certainly don't believe the official story, and I think she may well have died or was disabled, the evidence is still very speculative and weak. All the evidence is from the ancestry website, which is nothing even remotely close to government official documentation. Ancestry entries can be made by anyone. It is no…
Although I certainly don't believe the official story, and I think she may well have died or was disabled, the evidence is still very speculative and weak. All the evidence is from the ancestry website, which is nothing even remotely close to government official documentation. Ancestry entries can be made by anyone. It is not secure, nor is it validated. There is no official public record of her death anywhere.
There are no admissions from any members of her family, nothing.
We need better evidence than a 15 minute video which simply relies on a single non-credible source of data -- ancestry.com.
also, that video repeatedly refers the caller to the "Memorial" website. Important to remember the hospital has Memorial in its name. Viewers could easily be led to believe the phone answerer was directing the caller to a memorial (as in for the dead) website, which he wasn't.
Agreed, it doesn’t prove anything. Ironically, the most compelling evidence we have that she’s dead is the complete lack of definitive evidence that’s she’s actually still alive, which, as many others have already pointed out, would be extremely easy to produce, e.g., an interview with her.
Hi Mark,
Although I certainly don't believe the official story, and I think she may well have died or was disabled, the evidence is still very speculative and weak. All the evidence is from the ancestry website, which is nothing even remotely close to government official documentation. Ancestry entries can be made by anyone. It is not secure, nor is it validated. There is no official public record of her death anywhere.
There are no admissions from any members of her family, nothing.
We need better evidence than a 15 minute video which simply relies on a single non-credible source of data -- ancestry.com.
also, that video repeatedly refers the caller to the "Memorial" website. Important to remember the hospital has Memorial in its name. Viewers could easily be led to believe the phone answerer was directing the caller to a memorial (as in for the dead) website, which he wasn't.
Agreed, it doesn’t prove anything. Ironically, the most compelling evidence we have that she’s dead is the complete lack of definitive evidence that’s she’s actually still alive, which, as many others have already pointed out, would be extremely easy to produce, e.g., an interview with her.