Hi AZR
negative on the Poissons, Monsieur...
Ici.....
Quote:
"there is no reason that the tyre remnants would be free of applied materials from the metal shard"
Well, I disagree, and I could think of a number of reasons. Relative hardness of materials involved, for example.
if My interest was required to be objective I would not stop once I had found elastomer on and in the Titanium strip. I would continue and seek to find deposition of Alkyd and epoxy mastic on the rubber pieces. Did BEA? (it is exceedingly unlikely Titanium would be found on the rubber
). But NOT impossible, since remnants of grinding might be bound in the primer, or mastic!
"If you have no counter-proof, you may "just" admit it, say "I don't know" (*) instead of asking for a complementary proof that we know doesn't exist."
I missed this, does this mean you believe no proof one way or the other exists?
Do you think they sought such evidence?
1. They must have, if only to cement further their theory of "transverse cut".
2. They did not report the results of their Gas chromatography/electro phoresis?
3. They did report, and I missed it?
4. There was no such deposition?
5. If none, they missed a chance to cement Continental's 'guilt'?
6. If foreign material was identified, and not reported, they are incompetent?
I have no bias here, my enjoyment is in the discussion, especially with a bright and patient person such as you
