@bear - you've got a funny idea of what constitutes "evidence". "Any pilot who honestly looks at the evidence would say that cannot happen" is not evidence, it's supposition.
There are plenty of alternative explanations for the THS remaining fully nose-up that don't require mechanical failure to be a part of it, the only problem is that some of them will not be especially palatable to those members of the piloting community that are hoping against hope that the PF didn't make a fatal mistake.
With all due respect, you were clinging to the idea of a V/S failure when none of the available evidence supported it, and now you're hoping for some kind of THS failure when any supporting evidence has either not been released or does not exist.
Why is the idea that pilot error played a part (note : I'm not saying that it did) so abhorrent to you, and why do so many assume that there's some kind of conspiracy going on between the BEA, AF and Airbus to blame the pilots?