The point Barbies Boyfriend is trying to make is to add some objectivity to the debate.
It is that very absence of material evidence that indicates the apparently unthinkable conclusion that he identified in option 2 and, to quote a phrase that's been bandied about recently, it is clearly "beyond any reasonable doubt" that this accident was CFIT. There is not a shred, not the tiniest shred of evidence to suggest otherwise. It is the only credible explanation.
Well put. I suspect there are many here that would agree. Everyone I have spoken to on this subject in the MoD & RAF holds this view. Many feel the GN was uncalled for (something I would agree with - if only for the simple reason that they are deceased), but this not the same as saying - "now we have no idea what happened". This is changing history and the original BOI findings - which still seem to ring true to me.
Most refrain from posting along these lines, I suspect, on the grounds of decency and sympathy for those who have been most affected by this tragedy.
However, some of the opinion and conjuncture here & elsewhere is just getting out of hand. The Tornado slander is potentially outrageous.
I note that some posters have resorted to insulting and derogatory remarks about the posters who hold opinions that differ from their own - not usually a good sign.