This thread needs some Hooked on Phonics. A name is revealed, someone else posts the name, another person adds an extra name to it, then original revealer gets called sloppy. Comprehension for the win. And then people wonder how some can get so fooled by what someone says. *slaps forehead*
For the record... out of context is when you're quoted on something and only a portion is taken to make it seem misleading and posted elsewhere. Issleb's statements, which he posted himself, are not taken out of context. Even the language of his statement shows a single response, not responses from the past. There's nothing genuine about backtracking. Newsflash... liars that believe their story will sound genuine.
Forget the impossible preservation story that absolutely didn't include freezing, but now possibly could, only because it was brought up here first. Forget the multiple changes to the shooting story when it comes under scrutiny. Forget the little details that make no sense at all. All you need is to sound like you believe what you say and that's proof enough. Ignore evidence because talking around it makes more sense. You'd think that proof that things aren't possible as described would hold more merit, but only those statements aren't considered genuine. The rest of what they say are considered fact.