Michael, I think that they are absolultely right. If you accept DNA evidence for what it is, all other evidence, which is not definitive in any case, becomes irrellevant. Since various testimonies about all the things you mentioned were always contradictory to each other, we had no way of knowing which was correct. But DNA came along and put a rest to that. DNA evidence showed, unbiasely, where the answer lies.
For anyone who understands DNA and accepts it, that should pretty much be the end of it, unless out of curiousity you just want to find exaplanations for all the other evidence that contradicts it (but not negates it). And obviously there are explanations to all this other stuff, we just don't know what they are. But that doesn't mean that it can effectively contadict the DNA evidence, it can't. So someone continues doubting the answer that DNA gave us by bringing other evidence in, such as shoes, teeth and language abilities, it shows that this someone does not fully accept the DNA evidence. Anyone who fully understands what the DNA evidence means would see the absurdity of comparing DNA to shoes, teeth, bunions, language abilities, etc.
What I just said is probably going to make you angry and you may also accuse me of having personal agenda in this, but I assure you, the only personal agenda I have is to try to get across to the readers accurate information about what these DNA results actually mean, in comparison to the other evidence as well.
If you accept DNA, it means you now have your answer within 0.00025%, regardless of all the other, much less compelling, evidence. If you accept the other evidence, that means you are rejecting DNA results, which means you don't trust them for whatever reason. You can't accept the DNA results and also accept the other evidence like shoes, birth certificates, languages, etc. If you accept one then that means you reject the other, there is nothing in between...
DNA evidence tells us that although all these other claims exist about various contracdictory evidence, there are other possible explanations for the other evidence such as shoes and teeth, which may be that it was a mistaken testimony, lies, mix ups, whatever, but the explanations would be there. In contrast, there is no other possible explanation for what the DNA results showed us, none at all, unless you want to believe conspiracies, which of course you are welcome to, but you stated numerous times that you don't.
You should decide if you actually do believe DNA or you don't, and argue your points using other evidence based on that, but you really can't have it both ways... you can't say that you believe the DNA but that you believe the other evidence just as much.
