Replies

Prove it.

I find the posting to be a reasonable theory that would explain the unusual number of fires in food-processing plants of late. But it is only a theory.

And it would be much easier to disprove a theory than to prove a theory. That is how we do it. Propose a theory, then define the indicators that would confirm or refute the theory. In this case, a lack of confirming indicators would disprove the theory.

I understand that one of those incidents started when a private aircraft crashed in the parking lot of the facility. Our analyst team can probably exclude that case and it weakens the theory just a little bit more.

Take remaining incidents and determine the cause of each one.

If we cannot find any incident where arson is suspected, then the posted theory is probably wrong. But we are not quite done yet.

We also look for incidents where sabotage of equipment is suspected. Not quite the same traces as arson, but similar in results.

If we don't find anything like that, we are done with the proposed theory. It is wrong.

If "arson" or "sabotage" is the known cause of any one of them than we start checking the associates of each person employed at the plant. We look for third-degree, or second-degree connections with one of:

1) A Muslim terrorist group (High probability. Keep it very quiet,)

2) Our favorite White Supremicist group. (Low probability, but you know we have to check. Let this one leak)

3) A Black Supremicist group. (Low probability, but you never know. Keep it quiet)

4) A Militant Vegan Environmentalist group. (Low probability. But the Human Extinction movement has followers in places we would not expect. Take a quick discreet look around).

If we do find any connections, then the digging continues. The theory is still potentially valid.

If we don't find any of these connections, the proposed theory is again effectively disproved, and we are done. The theory is indeed wrong.

Or maybe we just don't have enough time or investigators to find the confirming evidence that is out there. Them's the breaks. But you gotta play the odds. Most of the time, if you don't find confirming evidence pretty quickly, it is because there isn't any - and your working theory must be discarded.

"Innocent until proven Guilty" does not apply in this sort of investigation.

"Correlation does not prove Causation" - but it is a great source of leads.