Again. . . I am not saying that the evidence doesn't look suspicious. But argument, even expert testimony, is not physical evidence. Yes, there are bits and pieces of evidence, but not enough for a conclusion of a missile or a bomb. But the MISSING evidence, which seems to have existed at one point, is reason enough to re-open the investigation.
I'm not overly skeptical, it's just the lawyer coming out in me.
Bottom line: I don't fully accept the "official" story, but there's not enough there at this point to accept any alternative theory.