@TTex600
For what it's worth, I'm not a pilot and am well aware of the difference between approach-to-stall procedure and stall procedure. I'm also aware that the ATP training only deals with the former. However I'm pretty sure that stall training itself should be part of the pilot's toolkit before getting anywhere near a jet - i.e. at the PPL level.
It looks like airline training was relying on that being somewhere in the background (at the 'riding-a-bike' level) and focusing on the approach-to-stall procedure to the exclusion of stall recovery, and I think all people are suggesting is that in future this might not be such a good idea.
Finally, the only instruments that were "untrustworthy" were the ASIs, and any gizmos that relied on them. Crucially, they had a working altimeter, working ADIs and working engine instrumentation - which was more than enough to stabilise the aircraft using pitch and power *if you know how to do it*. Transducers have been used in aircraft instrumentation since the 1970's and are no less reliable than their mechanical forebears.
Again, I think this discussion is better suited to the Tech Log thread.