Grading the New September Clues

From here.

Part A-- solid, good work. An "A".

Part B-- many suspect, or poorly documented, conclusions-- needs to work on analysis of perspective, visibility of wings at certain angles. Mike Walter interview a semi-waste of time, flight 93 analysis almost worthless. A "C-".

Part C-- again, many suspect conclusions-- needs to work on analysis of shadows, video anomalies, perspective, sound versus location, but some decent work as well. A "C".

Part D-- good compilation and an interesting finding, but too much time spent overall on this, IMO. A "B".

Part E-- the timing thing is interesting, but too much time spent on something not completely convincing; the color issue is good. A "B".

Part F-- pretty good on the background of the different videographers, not convinced that the Hlava shot is a simple edit of the Hezarkhani shot. A "B".

Part G-- a mish-mash of stuff, mostly decent. A "B".

Part H-- Simon really gets iffy when dealing with perspective-- just not convincing. The last minute is good, but the first 9 minutes-- diffuse, a waste of time. A "D".

Overall, many good points made this series, but far too many glib suspect conclusions that cast doubt on the "good stuff". The good stuff could easily be condensed into something taking half the time-- and should be!