Tim---Im guessing you are referring to the VII HD video.
No, I've more or less given up on the VII video. The full length VI video from 2010 released yesterday is where the action's at, IMHO. Please go back and look again, because there is so much new to see, we can all partake in the feast.
Tim you do realize that Mr.Glickman the photo analyst you are going to meet has given a
100% probability that the latest 2012 expedition has video that he states shows a man made debris field of lighter objects seperate from the Norwich city wreck?
Yet you have
"given up on the 2012 debris field video"? No excitement over Glickman's work is apparent. Instead your insist the previous expedition video, which Glickman already analyzed, dismissed, and did not find an airplane part is "where the action is"?
That shows little faith in Glickman or his photo expertise.
The film Glickman said was not electra parts you are excited about. The film Glickman is 100% positive shows a debris field you have given up on. I am getting very confused about what Tighar considers a debris field and who the expert is. Ric said Tim Mellon had expertise from being on the boat and if Tim says he sees something it should be re-examined.
At the same time Mr.Mellon says he has given up on an endorsed Glickman 2012 debris field that is certain to contain man made parts.
Where's waldo, or in this case, just where is the debris field? This cannot be the same debris field either because Glickman has already said nothing was found in the first film Mellon is looking at, yet Glickman is 100% sure of the second field. Or if it is the same field, then Glickman previously dismissed a "pile of plane parts", that Mr.Mellon says is plainly visible with easily identifiable plane components.
It is hardly a ringing endorsement of Mr.Glickman's 2012 photo research abilities when major contributers are using terms like "given up on it".The other alternative is suggesting Glickman missed an entire broken up plane Mr.Mellon plainly sees in area the size of a basketball court.
They cannot both be correct.