Gene: look, you are an admirable runner and all that, and an inspiration to masters and beyond. No offense, though, but please don't come on here and try to turn this into a thread about 1) what you're up to, or 2) this kind of "aw shucks, i believe in this guy, because I believe anything's possible for the older crowd". I know you didn't set out with that aim in mind, but that's what it's turning into.
Here's the deal: nobody is questioning that some (very few) 70+ runners can run 2:52 or 2:54 or whatever for the marathon. After all, SOMEBODY is going to have the best time, and the best time by definition is going to seem impressive. I don't doubt Ed Whitlock ran the times he is said to have run, and I have no reason to doubt your times either.
The reasons Frank Meza is being treated with great skepticism are (at least) threefold:
1) DQ from CIM 2014
2) numerous missed timing mats in prior races. Read the whole thread if you want examples. Sure, everybody's got a story of themselves or a friend missing a mat. However, when the same runner misses multiple mats in multiple races in which they happened to run world-class age-graded times with weirdly yo-yoing splits, it demands an explanation.
3) impossible splits. I'll do you a favor and copy and paste from an earlier post the splits from each 5k interval of one of Meza's marathons (LA 2018 I believe) along with a 4 other runners who ran similar times in the same race.
30545 Francisco Quijada (2:53:17) - 20:35, 20:36, 19:47, 19:26, 19:35, 20:27, 21:58, 21:14
30087 Fernando Navarro (2:54:54) 19:51, 19:40, 19:33, 19:36, 20:32, 21:04, 22:28, 22:28
1091 Kevin Purcell (2:53:46) 22:14, 21:41, 20:49, 20:25, 20:11, 20:18, 20:19, 19:36
22137 Danny Connolly (also 2:53:46) 20:20, 20:27, 20:05, 19:56, 20:38, 21:08, 21:21, 21:04
and here are Frank Meza's splits:
1287 Frank Meza (2:52:47) 20:47, 19:03, 20:28, 25:01, 18:34, 19:22, 21:28, 18:30
You, more than almost anyone else, are in a position to comment on the plausibility of these splits. Do you think having 5k splits varying between 18:34 and 25:01 and back to 18:30 in the same marathon at age 70-ish are remotely plausible? I mean, your splits are available in race results, and they look nothing like this. Nobody else in the same race looked like this. No world best ever looked like this. And if you think they are plausible, if you could, kindly present a possible scenario.
So, please don't resort to the "geez, it's tough to say, but I'm a-gonna give him the benefit of the doubt because I'm a nice, easygoing world record-holder". You either think these are possible, or you don't. I appreciate you posting in the thread, but in a way it works against the aim of this thread, because so many people are prone to the Argument from Authority Fallacy that all it takes is for you to say "I think he's probably legit", and all the carefully-prepared arguments from all other posters are for nought in the minds of many.