Just grasping at straws for an attempt to explain Froome, cause I'm pretty sure there's not a good explanation...
There's lots of good explanations for those who want to see them.
With regards to the Ventoux stage, the arguments have been remarkably simplistic.
I've been in Provence for the last few days and was able to watch Froome about 1km from the summit. I've also ridden a degree of that route on numerous occasions. Here's some observations.
Firstly most of the first 209km enjoyed a 20kph tailwind. On the gently rolling roads to the west of the Vercors and into the Drome Provencal, even I would average around 45kph on my own. It's hardly surprising that the peloton proceeded at such a breakneck speed.
Secondly it was clear that Froome's rear cassette was big. His high cadence attacks could well be explained by his ability to drop into a smaller gear than many of his adversaries. Certainly when he came past me (on a 9% gradient and having just dropped Quintana) he had a couple of climbing sprockets spare should he want to attack with a high cadence.
A final observation was that Froome's skin glistened with sweat as he passed - a clear sign that his body cooling system was still functioning satisfactorily. Looking at pictures of many others, their skin was dry as a bone. Now that is not a definitive sign of anything, but the possiblity of Contador and others dehydrating and imploding should not be ignored - just as Froome's ability to ride in high temperatures at altitude (having grown up in Kenya) should also not be swept under the carpet when we have seen climatic conditions like we have this past ten days.
It's a shame that no one stops to consider so many variables and their effects when spitefully spewing forth accusations on internet forums - but hardly surprising.