One point bothers me. Putting aside the possibility that the crew was simply overwhelmed by multiple sensory inputs and just could not think straight (and I suspect that we all have been in such a situation from time to time in the box), how is it that the observation of
(a) a reasonably level or nose up attitude plus
(b) low IAS plus
(c) a shedload of ROD
doesn't immediately equal the mental deduction of stall ?
The 'apparent' actions of the crew are truly a mystery and until the BEA releases a more detailed report (sometime next year?), there is no way to divine the truth of what happened with the coarse data and spotty information provided so far.