30th September 2010, 06:47 PM
You missed the point. What's objectionable are the assumptions and accusations people have made about the finder of the helmet, when they have no real evidence either way. Without the PAS or finder providing more information, there is no way to answer the questions which everyone -- including myself -- is asking.
As to the helmet being covered and then uncovered: erosion, vegetation being removed (whether a tree falling naturally or artificial removal of vegetation), or removal of other objects on the surface could easily have made accessible a location that wasn't covered before, without disturbing the helmet itself. This is of course pure speculation, but it's not implausible.
As to the helmet being covered and then uncovered: erosion, vegetation being removed (whether a tree falling naturally or artificial removal of vegetation), or removal of other objects on the surface could easily have made accessible a location that wasn't covered before, without disturbing the helmet itself. This is of course pure speculation, but it's not implausible.