I agree some people are too quick to trust the government, and that our government is capable of sophisticated operations, but there's a difference between mentioning the possibility and essentially asserting it as fact. "This was no crash - I know it was conspiracy - we'll never know the truth."
It detracts from us knowing stuff instead of adding to it, because it's basically saying "trust nothing - everything is a lie - but this is what actually happened based on my speculation." There's no debate that results, just confirmation bias. If people point out some specific suspicious things for discussion, that's helpful. We should not just go with the official story because there's no way they give us all the information on these things. But there's a difference between proposing it and acting as if it's the obvious scenario when it's not. I see claims that things would always/never happen that are simply false. "If there was a crash, there would be debris, so it didn't crash." That's definitely not true in the ocean. Contrast that with "until I see debris, given the other suspicious circumstances, I'm considering these possibilities," which is a reasonable discussion.
