Lyman,
I am trying to make a case for more understanding of this accident, not less.
It seems to me you are taking the case where the basic facts of the cause of this accident are well understood and attempting to make them less understood with your unsubstantiated theories, imagination and innuendoes.
Below is the released data, CVR and FDR from the BEA. That's all there is. In the absence of the Captain, the PF & the PNF stalled the airplane, never figured out they were stalled and upon the return of the Captain, he couldn't unravel what had taken place and what was happening in time to make a difference.
http://www.bea.aero/docspa/2009/f-cp...nexe.01.en.pdf
http://www.bea.aero/docspa/2009/f-cp...nexe.02.en.pdf
And here, an opportunity to learn, squandered.
I don't agree. It has certainly focused attention on high altitude, high speed manual flying as well as what to do and not do should UAS suddenly happen. So far, there has not been a repeat so there has been learning going on, one would think, not all has been squandered.