Thats why I said I have reason to believe. The data produced, even if you allow a lenient amount for mechanics over what the other specs are showing, was not close to what simc's initial expected values showed. I don't need to see the source code to say that. Now yeah, if I was arguing that it was flat out wrong, I would have to be able to point out an error in the source code or that would be meaningless.
You do have a good point about using multiple tools. However, if I had multiple tools and I had reason to believe one of them wasn't accurate reflecting real data in a specific instance, I certainly wouldn't be recommending that tool be used in that specific instance.