Readers occasionally write to ask whether we are in on the joke. The answer is yes, and also that the joke only works if we never break character in the documents themselves.
Register is the whole game
Fringe-research websites share a recognizable voice: long sentences, heavy citation theater, careful hedging that somehow always lands on the preferred conclusion. The Files copy that voice on purpose. When we say a document is “weighted heavily because it is specific and independent,” we mean it as parody of a real methodological move — and also as the actual methodological move a careful reader should demand from us.
Probability weights, stated out loud
Every document in the evidence locker carries an implicit weight. We are trying to make those weights explicit:
| Weight | Meaning |
|---|---|
| High | Specific, independent, costly to fake |
| Medium | Consistent with high-weight items but circular |
| Low | Oral, anonymous, high narrative temptation |
| Negative | Actively undermines the nuclear hypothesis (we still publish these) |
The Nauvoo ink analysis is medium-to-negative: it may show page 47 was altered. The Utah Geiger readings are medium-high if authentic and near-zero if the chain of custody fails. The Trinity second-light stories are low, and we say so on the page.
Why we will not wink inside the Files
A satirical archive that constantly reminds you it is satirical is just a sketch comedy show with footnotes. The Files keep the deadpan. The only place we break it is the FAQ entry that answers the question directly.
If you want the wink, it is there. If you want the dossier, it is everywhere else.