Well one thing I have to give whonoze is at least he's willing to discuss what he believes and why he believes it with the "opposition" so to speak.
I'll reiterate these points again though. As interesting as the clubhouse videos may be to some, in the end I find them virtually useless and uninteresting. I'm willing to discuss them and even present what I believe I see in them but again, at the end of the day there is just too much uncertainty involved. It's a simple test of basic epistemology.
Look, just take any part of the video that anyone says is George's truck, or any vehicle for that matter, and show it to someone, preferably someone who knows nothing about the case. Ask them to identify the make and model of the car. They won't be able to do it. That's really the end of the discussion right there. Now we may all agree, with the knowledge of the case, that one vehicle may more than likely be George's truck but again at the end of the day we can not say definitively that it is. And that's just the first and foremost problem. Once you get into the particulars of movement and such it becomes worse.
Then we have the basic standard of burden of proof and the scientific method. It's the burden of the person who makes the claim to prove that claim. It's fine to speculate, hypothesize and so on regarding what we see in the videos but again at the end of the day it will always remain in the realm of hypothesis and never move beyond that. Though I will say one could do some further observation by going there and doing some tests but I seriously doubt anyone is going to do that and none of us have access to preform tests so the point stands.
As much fun as we can have with that and arguing differing aspects, in the end that's all it will be, fun.