> Only for an unusual definition of "completely" IMO. Agreed. While the "usual explanation" may lack the details that actual testing provided, deduction and lo

> Only for an unusual definition of "completely" IMO. Agreed. While the "usual explanation" may lack the details that actual testing provided, deduction and logic in this case were pretty much harmonious with the findings. The water layer being thinner or more viscous than expected doesn't invalidate the basic assumption, and that's where all science starts, right? Some basic, yet to be disproved* assumption.