I think the title of the thread gave the opportunity for sceptics to explain why they are sceptics and give a concise analysis of their beliefs to enable folk like me to understand what they are on about.
Particularly if I can remember that far back without checking the OP ... in particular the attitude towards the present investigation here and in Portugal on behalf of Madeleine.
Seems there is a case to be made that sceptics may be few on the ground if there are any at all and huge objection to the suggestion there are 'beliefs'.
So I disagree regarding the thread. I think it was an opportunity for enlightenment and understanding which has been rejected. But there have been interesting snippets nonetheless.
From what I can distill down from it, there is this view of a stereotypical sceptic who all believe all of the same facets and are equally vociferous and immovable, like the Borg, assimilated and speaking in unison.
It really isn't like that at all. From what I see there are diverging views on various aspects even amongst us sceptics.
It's a bit harsh to suggest that 'we' have 'rejected' an opportunity for enlightenment and understanding - I think if you read back you will find that we were badgered incessantly from the get go as soon as we opened up. I personally faced the indignation of a public text-flogging for revealing one of the reasons that made me sceptical - so we're invited in, then hoofed around like an abductee in a Moldovan shipping container. (That's a joke, please delete as usual)
But I'm stupid enough and old enough to get on with it, but I'm glad you found the exercise useful.