It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The 84 RADES Data Shows "AA77" North of Citgo

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 27 2008 @ 01:18 AM
link   
This is bizarre yet strangely not surprising.

Here are the last 3 long/lat coordinate entries from the RADES data for "AA77".

aal77.com...



38 51 23.672 N 077 05 37.274 W (SW of driving range)
MISSED RETURN (Big gap)
38 52 16.862 N 077 03 48.703 W (North of Citgo)
38 52 05.584 N 077 03 39.502 W (Last entry, "impact" into 395)


Simply copy and paste the coordinates into Google Earth and press the magnifying glass for it to be searched and placed.

Rob Balsamo on John Farmer...




The person (recipient) who reportedly received this RADES data through the FOIA sent me these files within days after he received them. I saw -- and pointed out -- just what you have done above. However, the recipient wanted to argue those points "arent real", as if he was almost trying to say they didnt exist in the data, and proceeded to write up convoluted blogs regarding lat/long "last position" being at the point i exposed in our latest short presentation which included DME.

Of course i pointed all this out to the "recipient", that he cannot just ignore DME data, not to mention the data you describe above, but it appears he didnt want to hear it and ignored sound advice. We all now know what happened to his convoluted blogs he wrote up ignoring data... he eventually took them down. Perhaps he realized his bias/agenda? Or perhaps even his own "contact" (singular) he claimed to have showed him the same i was trying to tell him.

But yes Aldo, your observations are correct. Those are the last position points for AA77 according to Govt supplied data based on RADES. Its no surprise they do not add up or support the govt story
.



So if the data isn't accurate then why does the rest of it seem to match the flight path reported by the NTSB?


RADES:


NTSB:


So the most critical part of the flight path simply does not make sense.

Clearly this data can not be used as evidence against the north side claim no matter how you choose to spin it as imprecise.

Of course the testimony of Steve Chaconas who has the plane approaching from the east side of the river proves the RADES data fraudulent anyway.


watch testimony here


So the black box, radar data, and eyewitnesses are ALL irreconcilable with the physical damage although all in completely different ways.

Sheesh!

The official story can't get support from ANYTHING!



[edit on 27-2-2008 by Craig Ranke CIT]




posted on Feb, 27 2008 @ 01:54 AM
link   
Yes, there is a blip there and a blip there in the wrong place. I saw that before and presumed (?) there was a reasonable explanation for some weird returns there.




38 51 23.672 N 077 05 37.274 W (SW of driving range)
MISSED RETURN (Big gap)
38 52 16.862 N 077 03 48.703 W (North of Citgo)
38 52 05.584 N 077 03 39.502 W (Last entry, "impact" into 395)


Okay, so this 'big gap' - this is the one 'missed return' that happened along your impossible swerve that no witnesses saw. How do we know this was a missed return?
The spacing of them is odd: if that one return was there it'd be dot-dot-dot-dot-dooooooooooot-dotdot.

Obviously I'm no radar expert. However, why does the last return prior stop that far back? That's about 2 miles. Altitude is key isn't it? About 9:34:13 it dropped below coverage, somewhere below 2,000 ft and 1,000 feet above ground.

After that, 'missed returns' for at least 30 seconds (they come in every 12 it seems) as it gets lower and lower. Low enough at the end witnesses thought it hit the building. Tens of feet AGL as it cruised north of the Citgo you and a few others say.

So what the hell do either of you think a radar return can tell us about that?

Oh I know, nothing in particular, just a weid thing a couple non-radar experts thinks proves the data fraudulent. Get some solid expertise, have debunkers hack it from every angle, accept the criticisms, and THEN decide what these two extra apparent returns really signify. I'm not convinced its anything worth anyone's time. Prove me wrong if you can.

No I do not want to ask.com about BTW (WTF?) but BTW I am not PBnJ. He might be onto something there but that stuff is over my head. Just like radar's attention was well over all the action, impact or flyover.

[edit on 27-2-2008 by Caustic Logic]



posted on Feb, 27 2008 @ 11:12 AM
link   
Uh huh.

So you agree then that the radar data can not be accurately used as evidence against the north side claim since conveniently, just like the FDR, the most critical final moments of the flight path are simply incorrect, incomplete, or anomalous.



posted on Feb, 27 2008 @ 12:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
Uh huh.

So you agree then that the radar data can not be accurately used as evidence against the north side claim since conveniently, just like the FDR, the most critical final moments of the flight path are simply incorrect, incomplete, or anomalous.


We have the physical and eyewitness evidence that AA77 crashed into the Pentagon.

Any questions?



posted on Feb, 27 2008 @ 12:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CITSheesh!

The official story can't get support from ANYTHING!
[edit on 27-2-2008 by Craig Ranke CIT]


Yeah, except for the physical evidence.



posted on Feb, 27 2008 @ 01:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by darkbluesky

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CITSheesh!

The official story can't get support from ANYTHING!
[edit on 27-2-2008 by Craig Ranke CIT]


Yeah, except for the physical evidence.



Nope.

They didn't get that right either.

See here and here .



posted on Feb, 27 2008 @ 02:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT

Nope.

They didn't get that right either.

See here and here .


You crack me up Craig Ranke of CIT.

There is plenty of actual physical evidence that supports the "official story" read: Pentagon Building Performance Report.

light poles
trailer
generator
airplane parts
concrete curbing damage
damage pattern to the facade
damage pattern through the building (column deformation)

These all match the "official story" that the airplane approached from the south side of the Citgo and hit the building.

The fact that these examples of physical eveidence do not precisely match digitized and decoded bits of data from radar intercepts and binary data recorders does not in any way reduce their status as physical evidence.

All it does is bring into question the accuracy of the data collection, decoding, and interpretation of the digital and/or analog data from the DFRD and radar intercepts. FDR data is not intended to provide precise data pertaining to the exact orientation and position of an aircraft second by second, foot by foot. It is intended to provide a record of the status of
all aircraft systems, control surfaces, instrument positions, consumables status, etc. that can aid in determining, after the fact, what was happening onboard an aircraft that experienced trouble...minor or catastrophic.

You make me laugh because you continue to employ the same techniques you accuse others of using in this discussion. In this case:

Argument from incredulity.

Because you find it incredible that the foundation wasn't damaged to the degree you personally deem appropriate, doesn't mean it could not have happened that way.

The same goes for all of Aldo Marquis of CIT's assertions of incredulity stated on the Loose Change Forum, from which, both you and he have been banished.

Can you explain the unbelievable coincidence that your first name "Craig" and your cohorts last name "Marquis" combine to form the name of the AA supervisor (Craig Marquis) who spoke with Betty Ong from AA11 on 9-11 during the hijackings?

What is your part, if any, in this great deception?



posted on Feb, 27 2008 @ 02:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
Uh huh.

So you agree then that the radar data can not be accurately used as evidence against the north side claim since conveniently, just like the FDR, the most critical final moments of the flight path are simply incorrect, incomplete, or anomalous.


Yep. The radar, that's expected. No usable info past a certain point. What those blips are - searching beacon things not returned, the top of the fireball, who knows?

The FDR stops, it seems, just a few seconds later, not 30 actually (I forgot about that clock difference). This is unusual I gather and suspicious. Still it would normally stop later... at about the Citgo, maybe before or after - and corrupted after. If you'd like to call this a truncation to hide the north path, cool, but the rest of it still doesn't match your made-up spiral maneuver over DC so it's still all fruaudulent. They just chose not to fake the last seconds right? Why?

And as these other guys say, partial data aside, the vast majority of evidence clearly shows a 757 plowing in.



posted on Feb, 27 2008 @ 03:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by darkbluesky


The same goes for all of Aldo Marquis of CIT's assertions of incredulity stated on the Loose Change Forum, from which, both you and he have been banished.


You are quite incorrect.

We are both not only welcomed back to the forum and current prominent posters but we are both also credited in Loose Change Final Cut.



Can you explain the unbelievable coincidence that your first name "Craig" and your cohorts last name "Marquis" combine to form the name of the AA supervisor (Craig Marquis) who spoke with Betty Ong from AA11 on 9-11 during the hijackings?

What is your part, if any, in this great deception?




You are suggesting that I was a part of the "grand deception" because another person shares my common first name his common last name?



You conspiracy theorists crack me up.



posted on Feb, 27 2008 @ 03:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Caustic Logic

Yep. The radar, that's expected. No usable info past a certain point. What those blips are - searching beacon things not returned, the top of the fireball, who knows?



Ok as long as we are on the same page.

None of the officially released data is valid evidence against the north side claim.

Of course now that we have provided evidence proving the plane came from east of the river the implications are quite clear.

The official data is fraudulent.



posted on Feb, 28 2008 @ 10:41 AM
link   
reply to post by darkbluesky
 


light poles: none of which any of the so called "official witneeses saw get clip, but magically popped out of the ground. One 15 foot section speared a cab drivers windshield, while he and a "mystery" man, pulled it out, he THEN heard the explosion (this guy must move like the flash, and also have super strength cause he pulled that 15 foot section out, without scratching the hood of his car)

trailer : which trailer, the mysteriously blue tarp covered one, that brought, and revomed evidence?

generator :the generator that took damge from the explosion, but somehow supports a plane going into the pentagon banking to the left, and clipping the top with its right wing? When most all account have the plane dive bombing the pentagon, on a straight path but land short of the building, however the are no marks on the lawn.

airplane parts : Haha. You mean the 2 pieces I saw that were easily carried in one hand, and the dubious engine that doesn't match the plane in question? At least they planeted the correct landing gear, eh? (one plane part). Not airplane parts.


concrete curbing damage : have no idea what this mean, but all the damage to the pentagon does not match that of AA77

damage pattern to the facade : a 15 diameter hole?

damage pattern through the building (column deformation) :

a perfect 10 foot diameter hole exiting the C ring? Are we really supposed to believe this crumpling mass of rolling /sredding ALUMINUM slammed up against the pentago, makes a 15 foots holed, then gooes through 9 feet of reinforced concrete, and leaves a perfect 10ft diameter exit hole? I sure don't.

There is one thing that does fit the damage done to the pentagon exactly. Look at the damage dont by a cruise missile, and tell me there are not more similarities with it's damage to concrete building, than with large commuter jets. Which don't tend to do well against Reinforced concrete.

Probably double reinforced, the windows were all special blast resistant glass, ect. since this side of the pentagon just so happened to have recent construction done to it to safeguard it against attack. Now there's a coincidence.



posted on Feb, 28 2008 @ 01:14 PM
link   
Nola,

You're obviously passionate regarding this issue, and I respect that, as well as your opinions. However, from what you've written, it appears to me that unfortunately, you're woefully under-informed. Maybe you should do a little more homework?

Best of Luck



posted on Feb, 28 2008 @ 01:32 PM
link   
reply to post by darkbluesky
 



Homework? YOU are the one that needs remiedial education on 9-11 events.

Instead of giving an intelligent and succint reply to the round holes far back..and the total lack of luggage and clothing and engines and bodies, etc. etc. etc., you tell someone else to do hopmework!! Astounding gaul.

There IS NO way to reconcile the evidence with the official lie, and we all know it. The simple fact that the two massive six ton ( each ) engines would have made an impact hole and great damage to the outside of the Pentagon..yet did not, means that you lose. There was ONE hole no more than 16 X 16 before the roof collapsed later..and the pics prove that beyond any doubt. So where did the engines go? Why did they leave no holes and damage where they would have hit? How could the parts of a jetliner leave the round hole you ignored Lola on before? Impossoible.

This is what the truth is: Some people simply cannot IMAGINE the nation being run by openly criminal and traitorous gansters who are willing to murder thousands, if not millions, to get what they want. It would be to much for them to handle and still operate and get by every day.

The there are those who have some vested interest in maintaining the illusion of the official lie: Either by being a paid shill for the cabal, or a willing player who supports their demented and fascist schemes for one sick reason or another. There realy is no other choices, now are there? No one with any cognitive and rational mindset could possible believe all the hundreds of ' ionexplicable anomalies ' are just inconsequential nothings to be forgotten...they have to be factored in and when you do there is only one answer: Denial intended to protect the mind from trauma, and willing perversion of the truth to sustain the cabals advances and ruination of America.

No patriot or loyal American could possible justify any longer trusting the Bush cabal and their cronies in any way, shape or form. The evidence is too massive, too plain and clear. It cannot be denied. The line are drawn and truth is standing on one side and the cabal on the other; I truly believe that in the next year we will see the downfall of America and the beginning of the end, as we know it. And the drones with blinders on can be thanked for their willful ignorance and stubborn trust of proven criminals, liars, traitors and murderers..even when proof is staring them in the face.

If the cabals lackeys can keep the focus on small items that may have bearing in the big picture but cannot be called a smoking gun item, they win by default. the big picture must be focised on, as well as the small details..and the big picture says we are screwed.



posted on Feb, 28 2008 @ 03:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by eyewitness86
reply to post by darkbluesky
 



Homework? YOU are the one that needs remiedial education on 9-11 events.



Don't think so.


Nola said:


trailer : which trailer, the mysteriously blue tarp covered one, that brought, and revomed evidence?


This trailer...the generator trailer:



Then Nola said:


airplane parts : Haha. You mean the 2 pieces I saw that were easily carried in one hand, and the dubious engine that doesn't match the plane in question? At least they planeted the correct landing gear, eh? (one plane part). Not airplane parts.


I and many others have posted scores and scores of pictures showing hundreds of airplane parts recovered at the Pentagon.

If Nola wants to say there were only two airplane parts found that could be carried in one hand, an engine that doesn't match, and a landing gear strut, that's her perogative, but I need to point out that that its been proven beyond any doubt that the engine is a Rolls Royce RB 211 (correct for a 757).



It would be very difficult to "plant" an engine and landing gear, and there is photographic evidence of hundreds of other parts.

Then Nola said:


concrete curbing damage : have no idea what this mean, but....


Like I said maybe some more homework would help.


Then:


damage pattern to the facade : a 15 diameter hole?


No... this precollapse opening...



Then:


a perfect 10 foot diameter hole exiting the C ring? Are we really supposed to believe this crumpling mass of rolling /sredding ALUMINUM slammed up against the pentago, makes a 15 foots holed, then gooes through 9 feet of reinforced concrete, and leaves a perfect 10ft diameter exit hole? I sure don't.


There was not 9 feet of reinforced concrete as was clrearly demonstrated and proven in this thread....

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Here is what happened to the reinforced columns...




Then you said...



Instead of giving an intelligent and succint reply to the round holes far back..and the total lack of luggage and clothing and engines and bodies, etc. etc. etc., you tell someone else to do hopmework!! Astounding gaul.


To which I say...I've done my homework.

Then you indirectly accuse me of profiting from stating my opinions or being a demented facist...all of which are against the rules of decorum, and for which I've recieved warnings in the past.

Your statement...


The there are those who have some vested interest in maintaining the illusion of the official lie: Either by being a paid shill for the cabal, or a willing player who supports their demented and fascist schemes for one sick reason or another.


Now, Im going to tel you to do soem homework.

YOU said....

The simple fact that the two massive six ton ( each ) engines would have made an impact hole and great damage to the outside of the Pentagon..yet did not, means that you lose


The RB-211s fitted on 757s wieghs 3.5 tons...not six tons each

Rolls Royce 211 Specs

Then you said...


There was ONE hole no more than 16 X 16 before the roof collapsed later..and the pics prove that beyond any doubt.


To which I reply.....LOOK AT THE PICTURE OF THE FACADE ABOVE!


I don't disagree that the events of 9/11 generate some suspicions of government foreknowledge or even some form of complicity...perhaps manifested as non interference...but to cling to these fantasies that no airplanes were used is naive in my opinion...but have at it.



posted on Feb, 28 2008 @ 03:26 PM
link   
Eyewitness...Now I see the source of your angst. It was you way back on another thread that asked about luggage and bodies and 6 ton engines etc.

I responded to you intelligently and succintly...I'm not sure where your hostility is coming from??

Here is the page from that thread...

www.abovetopsecret.com...


ETA:

Sorry to the OP for going so far off topic.

Eyewitness, Nola...if you want to continue this line of debate lets go to the thread linked above in this post.

Thanks



[edit on 2/28/2008 by darkbluesky]

[edit on 2/28/2008 by darkbluesky]




top topics



 
1

log in

join