All I'm saying is that if the start point is not known, the end point is not known because one is dependent on the other. The investigation team presumably have access to more information than we do and at some point they changed their minds about what they thought happened.
I don't have a problem with that but when you come along and start to claim that their working hypothesis back in March was "provably false", those are strong words and I have to respond by saying that it is probably irrelevant at this point in time.