Flight 77's Shadow?

Ask him why one of both 2 yellow pins on the map is not starting nearly exactly on top of the west wall impact event. The :36 second one.
Since we can see from the notation of the times attached to the RADES radar returns, they used an atomic clock reference. (09:37:36.805)

That means that RADES can calculate the 3D positions extremely correct.
In both the vertical and horizontal plains.

If John Farmers theory has merit, at least one of the radar returns would have to be exactly or very near the official impact point. In this case the earlier, :36 seconds one.

One other important thing to check if his theory is right :
At which side of the shown map with the 2 yellow pins, is the 84th Rades squadron radar disk situated?

If you know that disk's position's bearing, and follow John Farmer's reasoning, ("" the rising fireball and smoke column are moving slightly to the southwest. ""), then there is only one possible RADES radar disk position to fit the theory.

Draw a line through both yellow pins, that is the trajectory covered and followed by the rising fireball, registered as the fake last 2 flight positions of flight 77, according to John Farmer.
(As you see, there is a compass rose in the right top corner of the Google map shown above. Draw a line through its center and the SW position, that's the direction where RADES must lay on the map)

During one full 360° sweep of the RADES radar disk, which seem to take only 12 seconds, that fireball must have moved quite an impressive distance, with a far too fast velocity, for a smoke cloud.
Just measure the distance between both yellow pins.

Can some one post the above map with the line drawn through the 2 pins, and the position direction (an arrow) of the RADES radar disk which "looked" in the direction of the Pentagon ?

RADES radar disk must lay nearly exactly on the extended line through the 2 yellow pins, in the southern direction, to be able to register first the :36 sec radar return, and then in the next 12 seconds radar disk sweep, the :48 sec radar return, while that fireball moves in the southwest direction.

Only in that case is John Farmer's assumption reasonable, and still we must check with Air Traffic Controll radar personnel if a rising fireball can be mistaken at all on a radar screen for a solid plane, flight AA77.

I expect that the RADES radar disk is situated somewhere on that huge airfield near Washington, Andrews AFB.
Where the C-130 with call-sign "Gopher6" took off from, and then flew over the Washington Mall.

[edit on 8/11/07 by LaBTop]

This is their own website, www.rades.hill.af.mil...
But the links bar on top does not function, only the text on the Welcome page is to be viewed, while it says that it is their PUBLIC website.
Perhaps a security issue? Strange for a public site.

This is a year 2000 article about the task of the Hill Air Force Base, 84th Radar Evaluation Squadron.
Source : www.afcea.org...

Radar is a primary tool for defining what is occurring in U.S. airspace. A lone radar, however, provides a very limited view of an area based on location and specific environmental factors. A more accurate picture of an area of interest can be obtained when data from overlapping coverage of multiple radar sites is combined and analyzed.

""Combining and analyzing data is one of the functions of the radar data interface system (RDIS) developed by the 84th RADES. This radar data recorder assesses the performance of multiple radar sites supporting the joint surveillance system (JSS), an overlapping system of radar units positioned across the perimeter of the continental United States. The JSS is co-owned by the U.S. Air Force and the Federal Aviation Administration.""

Thus, my above remark about ONE radar disk's data is now obsolete, since they evaluated the data from multiple systems on 12 September 2001.
However, this makes the positioning of these 2 last radar returns even more interesting, since we may conclude now, that those positions are damn accurate, if we may believe the professionals at RADES.

The point still stands that there is video record of shadow flash

Meaning probably:

1) Video capture anomaly/system synthesis error.
2) Something captured other than a 757 or similar wide body.
3) Added misinformation.


The fact that the video contains the anomaly yet was publicly-released with statements such as “CITGO Gas Station Cameras Near Pentagon Evidently Did Not Capture Attack” is disingenuous at best.

A blip -on screen- at approximately the location and timeframe supporting the official attack sequence makes the image’s coincidence highly unlikely and should not just pique ATS curiosity.

So pick your poison folks.

1)We are seeing something else here.
2)The good folks at the FBI are presently working hard on bringing home ultimate 911 justice,
3)This is proof of evidence tampering (all be it subtly in support of).

While chewing on this, I will try to remain open to proofs validating flight 77 or the errant trash can lid at 200’-100’ south of CITGO on 911.

Best,
-Scrap

Originally posted by LaBTop
Caustic,
One of each of those double stars is mine.
Because I had the impression you had put a lot of effort into this subject of those black dots, but didn't make a strong impression of actually believing yourself, that they were parts of an eventual shadow of flight 77 passing by the Citgo on the south side.
And Scrapple did counter your, I admit that, hard work, by using your own kind of logic and reasoning and proving your conclusions wrong or at least questionable, in my eyes.

Alright, so the problem is I'm not all "HARD FROOF 100%!!" about it, and Scrapple was able to point out some apparent anomalies in how the shadow looks. Well, I'm quite certain this shadow lines up perfect with 77 for location, timing, and possibly size, it's just not my style to scream it. it could be heading any other direction and just happens to line up 2.167 sec. prior to the explosions by sheer coincidence, etc. but the best fit is the 'official' one. The only problem is in its apparent shape as captured in this crappy video - Scrap's noting the missing nosecone from how I modeled it is worthy - and of course the possiblity the shadow is digital and represents nothing.

The one star of mine is for your follow up long post, where you gave the info to find this highly interesting link to the research of John Farmer :

911files.info...
911files.info... :

And all the rest is interesting but a bit OT. I haven't looked into this RADES stuff much yet and have nothing to say. I was thinking of starting a thread on it, and will do so now. So maybe you could also share this stuff there. Imteresting drone theory - made me chucjle a bit, but if you could illustrate it better...

dbl again!

[edit on 9-11-2007 by Caustic Logic]

reply to post by scrapple


Fair enuff summation. Glad we can get to this point. Now it's another Rorschach test where people see what they want.