There is an interesting program on the Smithsonian channel called “Mayday: Air Disaster” which details and dramatizes many different major air incident investigations. The investigative techniques and strategies are spelled out. Some of which are applicable to the JFK assassination. One that is stressed over and over is starting out with no preconceptions about what might have happened. The investigators typically avoid the news and other reports while traveling to the scene to gather evidence. Then once the evidence begins to suggest to them some likely scenarios to evaluate, they start eliminating some of the possibilities. Usually they begin with the scenario that appears most likely. If that scenario is proven to be impossible (based on the evidence) then they cross it off the list and test the next scenario. When the impossible has been eliminated, they are left with the possibilities and go about the business of trying to find conclusive evidence that proves one of them is true.
This forum typically is plagued with never ending arguments between people who already have their minds made up. It would be refreshing to see how an investigation by a team of experienced NTSB investigators would approach and solve the JFK assassination.
I think that air plane crash investigators would determine that they don’t have the expertise to look into this. If they did look into it, I don’t know what they would conclude.
But I know what they wouldn’t do.
If there was a conflict between what the black boxes showed and what the eyewitnesses reported, they wouldn’t conclude that the eyewitnesses must be right and the black boxes must have been tampered with. Because how else could most or all of the eyewitnesses be wrong?
If there was a conflict between what the films of the crash showed and what the eyewitnesses reported, they wouldn’t conclude that the eyewitnesses must be right and so the films of the crash must all be fake.
If some of their experts determine that a certain part broke before the crash, not as a result of the crash, they wouldn’t reject what the experts, reject what all the experts in the world who they consult with tell them, but go with the armchair experts. Sort of like CTers ignoring what real world ballistic experts tell them what is possible and go with the armchair experts who say there is no way a MC/WCC bullet could make seven wounds and come out so ‘pristine’.
