These two gentlemen - Kaufman and Ebert, are impressively qualified - and very impressive not only in capability, but in their dispassionate detachment. They make clear and reasonable statements as to their own observations and do so very objectively.
I'm carried beyond the answer that was so needed to the suit and on to something larger for us to live by in certain of Kaufman's words in particular, as he speaks of the plaintiff's expert's report -
"...entirely lacking in rigor...it is important to remain skeptical of any purported identification unless the object has been examined directly... Nothing of the sort can be done with only a video in hand."
These words represent a gold standard for the researcher and must be the timeless handmaidens of well-founded research, IMO. I would not know how to sum the whole thing better than that - scientific rigor and the need to go and touch to verify are utterly vital; the footage alone suggests many things, depending on the observer, and can prove nothing.
These experts also reveal overwhelming reasons, in my view, as to why these things are very likely NOT Electra wreckage.
In the end, Tim is of course entitled to his personal view of the footage and what it means. I can respect that, but that does not mean the rest of the community must accept his view.
Now we have opposing expert witnesses and our own judgment to rely on. That judgment must be clear to most observers. So with all due respect and hoping that ambassadorial goodwill is at-work, I hope that these realities will help carry us to an early and happier conclusion than we've been living with for some time.
I am grateful for the level of scientific rigor finally visited upon this issue and find it done in the best spirit of what TIGHAR is about. Rigor and highly qualified objectivity have come to bear.