Correct. I'm suggesting that you stop trying. It accomplishes nothing. Even if someone's theory is off, and he is reasonably sincere, he can help by raising doubts about Zippy's credibility. Anything negative is damaging. And however unwashed the theorist may be, he could surprise us and be right.
It's not enough to prove our case to each other with parsimonious perfection. We have to win the war with the DNCPUSA, who care nothing for logic.
You, I am guessing (re: line quoted, above) regard requiring even the merest, most minute morsel of evidence in support of an extraordinary claim -- my request, remember -- as being in search of "parsimonious perfection."
In the same fraternal spirit as the discussion was begun: we're simply going to have to disagree on any such definition as infinitely (and, IMHO, unreasonably) elastic as all of that, I'm afraid. ;)
Again: I wait patiently... although not (in all perfect candor) with any great expectations. Ah, well.