I'm probably getting waaay ahead of the game here, but in thinking about the process of verification of all of this after Jeff Glickman completes his report, are we considering a way to do blinded experiments? Here's a thought: Present a panel of people who routinely work with hyperspectral imaging (or one such person if in short supply as I suspect they are) with 10 or so black and white, severely cropped image files of vintage aircraft, including a crop from the Miami photo. They, of course, wouldn't know which image was the Miami photo. Then request they identify the photo or photos that best match Jeff's hyperspectral scan of rivet patterns on 2-2-V-1. This, to me, has the benefit of enhanced validity over the alternative idea of simply giving free access to Jeff's files and conclusions and asking other experts if Jeff's (now TIGHAR's) conclusions on the patch are right. (It also has the benefit of reminding me of a scene from a favorite movie, The Manchurian Candidate... Anyone remember that projector slide show scene where Sinatra says, "Hold it General, please...Hold the one on the right, please...")
I trust Jeff implicitly, of course, but he's our longtime expert and recognized as such. We need a way to allow source(s) as objective as possible to weigh in with unimpeachable credibility.
Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078ECPR