If we establish it's all a lie, we would have 100 % coverage, if we presume 80 % is a lie, it gives us 20 % to find the truth...that sounds like a well known equation...sure we can't be totally sure, but if all information shows that there is a small percentage that this story is true, we have to work with that margin. Somehow we can from that calculate that "some" is true...and "some" is a lie...if we see it mathemathically, the percentage of all this is quite small, but it sure only takes 1 percentage to make it all real..

It's much like when a beaker runs over, one drop might be the one that shows the entire content of the cup..much like the DNA is a verifiable part of a being...once we match it up..

So, the logical assumption to this case would be 80/20*100/x in first mention, which again shows that this case has a percentage of at least 20 to a hundred to be true...if we calculate the false interventions...so this case might have flaws, but logically it also have a smaller percentage of lie...if you catch my drift?

Conclusionally, and this is where everything is in play, please correct me, some 80 percentage is flaw, and the remaning 20 is true, if we calculate right. So, if some part of the story is true, we rely on that. That gives us the span of appr. 2,5 % being real, if we adjust for flaws..so we see it, as partially real. (80/20*2.5Â½*80=801/8=100,125)

So if we wan't to see it optimistically, this entire saga might be true, even if the logical amounts are small.

Something tells me, that this is what was intended here, to reveal a very small part that is actually real, embedded into a story that would make most people think it's not true...to reveal evidence that is so much hidden by the story confirmed by someone like "Isaac".

Sure, this is my view, please come forward if you have a different observation..and sure I can't be entirely right, as this is just another assumption..or theory, if you want it to be called that!

EVS