PBL,
One of the remarkable properties of this public PPRunE thread has been its contributors' collective tolerance for the off-the-wall ideas that appear from time to time within what seems to be a rather disciplined atmosphere of good engineering, flight experience, and science.
With so few facts known about the AF447 upset, it seems to me that laying out on the examining table all possibilities and knowns in a grand mashup of theory (and perhaps rhetoric), then letting those ideas that withstand a "test of reasonableness" percolate to the top is a good approach. If you review this and the prior AF447 thread, I believe you will discover a certain springiness that continually returns the contributions to reasonableness. Unlike BEA, contributors here are not REQUIRED to reach a conclusion, yet they continue to work hard studying the mashup and seeking to understand the puzzle.
If I might expand your own metaphor, last time I was at the Philharmonie in Berlin (where my ladyfriend had a memorable coughing fit in the tight balcony tier far from an exit), the violinist tuned to A=443Hz. Though an ISO standard since 1955,
A does not always equal 440Hz. This thread has had excellent contributions from aviation experts and others who know the standards and expected behaviors but will still ask "what if" and think outside of the box. Indeed, there has been very little bashing of manufacturers, authorities, third parties, or agencies, if that is what you mean by rhetoric.
GB