By real knowledge of the problem domain. I know that sort of argumentation is unpopular, but it’s genuinely correct in this case.
If anything, this incident has been predicted and warned for years and years and years, and is an indictment of FAA and ATC policy over the last couple decades, accelerating over the last 2-8 years or so.
The reason we can assume there’s no connection between the new administration and this incident is… because there’s no reason to make that assumption, based on the reality of ATC policy, (lack of) changes in the problem domain, and longstanding known risks in the status quo.
That this has been a known problem for a while (which I agree with) does not necessarily mean that recent actions haven’t made the problem worse. The parent asked how you can know it’s “definitely unrelated,” which seems like a pretty high bar that you haven’t come close to meeting.
If anything, this incident has been predicted and warned for years and years and years, and is an indictment of FAA and ATC policy over the last couple decades, accelerating over the last 2-8 years or so.
The reason we can assume there’s no connection between the new administration and this incident is… because there’s no reason to make that assumption, based on the reality of ATC policy, (lack of) changes in the problem domain, and longstanding known risks in the status quo.