"How many pictures of an ear with obviously different cartilage structure would you need?"

 How many people need to bring up there's foam pressing on that ear do you need?

 It's in the photo.  You can see there's foam pressing on that ear.

 I will go with people who work in the field.  I posted some, and of course they are all wrong.  As I have said before, if information s presented you don't like, you dismiss it, or it must be incorrect.  Why even ask for information if you are only willing to accept data that matches your opinion?

 A guy works on 60 thousand human heads, he 's wrong.  A guy who has never worked on a single human head, he's right.

"Unless pressure on the neck can change the shape of cartilage inside the ear."

 According to professionals in the field.  One's that know anatomy, work on human ears, reconstruct human ears, cut apart human ears, yes.

 But they are all wrong.  I understand that is your opinion, I will go with the collective data presented.  That data indicates that the human ear shape in that photo is altered by the foam pressing on the ear.  Not the neck, it is touching the ear.

 I'm not ducking or hiding, I am making my opinion very clear and I am citing my sources.  

 That's my opinion.

"You can believe what you're told."

 I will.

 A guy works on 60,000 motorcycles, a group of mechanics get together, between them over 100,000 motorcycles worked on.  They build them, they are nationally consulted on their motorcycle knowledge, they can assemble them in their sleep.

 A guy looks at a picture of a motorcycle.

 Who will you ask for advice on a motorcycle?

 I will ask the group that has decades experience with over a hundred thousand bikes.  You won't.  Press on your wife's ear all day, that's one ear.  I will go with the group of professionals that have worked on thousands of ears.

 My question is, as it always is, why do you ask for information if you will just call it all wrong, or ignore it, if it doesn't coincide with your beliefs?  I mean why didn't you ask, "Do you know anyone that agrees with me about the ear?"  That's what you really wanted to know.

Eegore wrote on 01/16/20 at 18:52:45:

 
 I will ask the group that has decades experience with over a hundred thousand bikes.  
You won't.

Yet,
you consider the billions of people that use, are familiar with, that routinely shoot, that keep up on information about Firearms, Etc, Etc, Etc.
To, NOT, be knowledgeable about Firearms.

Yet consider people like tt who, 'says', they have a Firearm, Bloomberg,  and people who want to rewrite Freedom OUT of a Constitutional
Amendment,  a 'expert'.

"Yet,
you consider the billions of people that use, are familiar with, that routinely shoot, that keep up on information about Firearms, Etc, Etc, Etc.
To, NOT, be knowledgeable about Firearms.

Yet consider people like tt who, 'says', they have a Firearm, Bloomberg,  and people who want to rewrite Freedom OUT of a Constitutional
Amendment,  a 'expert'."

 
 Not even close.  Reference one post where I am pro-gun control.  Specifically agreeing that firearms should be removed from US citizen's ownership.

 Reference where I ever indicated in any form that Bloomberg is correct.  I can reference posts where I think he was wrong.

http://suzukisavage.com/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1578968215


 The real issue is that you over react when I say something like people are concerned about "murder rate per minute" and think I am saying high-capacity magazines should be removed.  Acknowledging the opposition's argument is not equal to agreeing, its actually a proven effective strategy to stop firearm control legislation.

"You have argued every position other than he committed suicide.  Please feel free to elaborate on what you believe transpired."

 Incorrect.  I said when I get 20 expert assessments I will look over the content and create an opinion.  The difference being I am willing to create an opinion after I get evidence and consultation, not prior to, and not select exclusively the evidence that supports my opinion, which doesn't exist.  I'd rather not have an opinion.

 What I did say was this:

"I prefer the physical evidence over circumstance, but I can also see where the situation has other circumstances that could indicate foul play."


That statement is being ignored because I do not think "two guys" were brought into a Federal Maximum Security facility in the middle of the night and not one staff member thought it would be important to bring that up.  I do not think two staff members were forced to take a "smoke break" and choose to not bring that up.  

 I do not think the camera footage is professionally altered to cover up the "smoke break" and the "two guys" entering the area.  I do not think a body double was murdered, his entire social network murdered or paid off, and the Real Epstein is really alive somewhere.

 Just because I challenge the presented scenarios does not mean I think the only outcome possible is suicide.  

"Can't we just count our IRA's and saving accounts, etc...and be happy instead?"

 
 I can do both.

People in prison are fingerprinted,.. and today, probably DNA sampled.
A body switch would be nearly impossible.

Only a very stable genius could manage it...