I am not looking so much for a comment, but I would like people to think of what is being said and relate it to how they believe people would look at what we say and except it as truth.

Does our present methodology, being used to develop a level of certainty, allow us to make a determination with a lesser level of confidence increasing the possible rate of error of a determination? I believe all people involved in this profession want to reduce any potential error rate, and the only way this can be done is by conducting a valid investigation. What we do not want happening is that an investigator thinks that he or she has satisfactorily tested their hypothesis based on the fact they have reached a level of confidence that is presently applied to the word “Probable”. Should this methodology only be used for the classification of the incident as accidental, incendiary, or natural and not use it to address a level of certainty for the cause of the incident?