As an impartial observer with a scientific background I wouldn't describe the debate here as bullying in any way. It is simply that one person in the debate has a very reasoned, analytical approach to assessing the information available, validating it's merits, discarding that which is without merit and verifying the results. The other person is working on a hunch with little or no scrutiny of the evidence available. The possibility that water in the tail could have caused weakening/seperation of the fin has been investigated and dismissed by all of the investigators. Why continue to flog the dead horse? Do you really think that either they all missed the evidence, or that all the investigators are conspiring to hide the truth?