Occam would not have allowed himself to see only partitioned forensic evidence, excluding other injuries, completely neglecting the seven whose injuries challenge a rigid and blinkered conclusion of "seated at impact."
An easy and uncomplicated result cannot so qualify when incomplete work is done, or results are left out.
Unwinding this all too easy explanation backward from its conclusion takes one to some challenges that aren't explained. Only that evidence that supports a prior theory is included here. Occam's no fool, and easy doesn't add up to simple all the time.
The onset of upset and the unknown path downward may have produced evidence in the bodies of other things. Eventrated lung tissue, amputations not indicative of a seated posture, even a fully crepitus corpse, the "rag doll" effect. The injuries described in the second report relative to "proving" a seated person, could easily have been incurred while standing, or running. Soft tissue damage is left out; the lap belt can scythe through the musculature in the legs, down to the bone, frequently causing a fracture, the 'marionette' injury.
Another mystery. If the 43 were seated and belted, how did the rescuers discover them without the seat?
Last edited by bearfoil; 14th May 2010 at 23:32.