In article ,
Mxsmanic wrote:

Mike Ash writes:

It's trivial to imagine many other plausible explanations. The others
are not LIKELY, but there are tons of scenarios which are plausible.

Such as?

Such as, Cirrus pilot had a heart attack thirty seconds before, Cirrus
had an engine failure, Cirrus hit large bird whose entrails covered the
forward view, etc.

If they are not likely, why bother to imagine them? The purpose of an
accident investigation is to find the most probable cause for an accident, not
to find alternative but unlikely explanations that exonerate the pilot.

You said "plausible", not "relevant to the purpose of an accident
investigation".

Nice to see that you're still twisting out of every argument to make
yourself look good, but you forgot to do your usual excessive snipping
this time around.

--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon