9/11: A Boeing 757 *DID NOT* Strike the Pentagon, page 28
Pages: <<  25    26    27    28  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 2 times


reply posted on 3-5-2007 @ 12:42 AM by Caustic Logic
I didn't say they WERE lying, but something doesn't add up.

The flight path - north of the Citgo - this does not fit the physical evidence and leads us to overflight theories. This makes me doubt the animation more that question the official story but that's a personal take.

Altitude discrepancy: proved by the re-set from 29.92 to 30,23 or whatever exactly at FL180, in the CSV but not the animation. As you ask, what terrorist would do that? IF this is real, it's big deal. If not... well, that's a different but smaller big deal.

authenticity: I've not found No ind. mention from the NTSB of either the CSV file or any type of animations.
Paper trail on the animation as shown here:
z9.invisionfree.com...
The cover letter states “specifically, you requested NTSB report of the flight path study for [flights 11, 175, 77]. [...] The information requested is on three CD-ROMs.”
There is no mention of animation, video, bit rates, etc and the info for three flights on three CDRs, which seems a bit small for me for three full-length flight animations.

Most importantly, the title "flight paths study" seems to refer to the documents compiled by the NTSB for those three flights (as well as for 93, tho not included).
Flight 77 FPS available here:
www.ntsb.gov...

Now... is this the cover letter for the animation's release to "Snowygrouch?" Or for the release of the FPS documents? Why would the animations also be titled "Flight Path Studies?"

In short I'm not so sure the NTSB ever made or sent out this animation. Not to say it's faked, but at the very least its NTSB pedigree is not well documented. If you would like to look into that and help me clear it up then cool. Otherwise just ignore.



reply posted on 3-5-2007 @ 01:38 PM by Caustic Logic
Sorry Mr Lear to be too confrontational - sometimes I let the "fraud" "frustrate" me too much. (and yes, you're on my namebase list in case you didn't know, one of I think 108.

My valid point with pointing out the data questions is that if we're now looking at it as evidence, it's important to note that it's accuracy/pedigree is in some doubt, and along with it the relevnce of any discussion based on it. But if it's correct, then you have a good case here for NO HIJACKERS on board and an overflight, recorded right on the FDR which was then planted in the Pentagon (?) to fool us...
Pages: <<  25    26    27    28  >>    ^^TOP^^



9-11 lecture at Basel University, Switzerland.
  Posted 14 days ago with 14 member flags
9/11 Actors re-visited
  Posted 7 days ago with 13 member flags
Wikipedia categorizes 9/11 truth as \'denialism\'
  Posted 18 days ago with 11 member flags
Building Collapses in Rio
  Posted 15 days ago with 6 member flags
new film "Human the film (2012)" covers all the bases and more!
  Posted 9 days ago with 6 member flags
you must try this youre self ????
  Posted 14 days ago with 4 member flags