Originally Posted by JayUtah

I think I see Astrophotographer's point a little better. The identification of the objects as stars is so straightforward that it is odd for Quijano to have considered anything else. It is odd for him to have considered them comet debris because debris would have more closely matched the movement of the comment, which Quijano was ostensibly tracking during his exposure. In other words, to overlook such a simple, obvious answer in favor of one for which there really was no evidence calls into question Quijano's motive in interpreting his photographs.