“””” But now that you've decided that the adjusted times are accurate, and have based your thesis on your opinion that the NIST times are accurate for all 5 events, you've got a new problem.
The plane strike for WTC 2 is at 9:02:59, and the seismic waves arrive at the LDEO graphs at 9:03:11. That's a 12 second retention time. Are you now saying that Dr Kim's 17 second retention time is wrong?
And if you now use the 12 second retention time, and the "Cianca" dent is at :46, then a 12 second retention time takes it to:58..... which, again, is exactly where the LDEO graphs begin reacting. ”””””
I have no clue if ALL the NIST times are accurate for all 5 events, but to add to the confusion, I’ll redirect you to the Furlong and Ross study at Study of 911:
Have a damn good look at all “officially” stated times by several US Institutions, and your head will spin like you’re inside a washing machine.
Let’s see, the second plane impact varies from :
09:02:40 (NTSB report, 2002) to
09:02:54 (LDEO, 2001 and FEMA, 2002) to
9:02:57 (LDEO revised, 2006) to
09:02:54 (NIST, Jan 05) to
9:02:59 (NIST revised, 2006) to
09:03:11 (9/11 Commission Final Report) to
09:03:14 (FAA Report, date ?) to
09:03:17 (Vanity Fair article)
Within the Federal Aviation Administration’s “Summary of Air Traffic Hijack Events September 11,
2001” are found the impact times of 8:46:35 and 9:03:14.
Link: FAA Summary of Air Traffic Hijack Events September 11,2001
What is interesting is, when the 9 seconds found on the Jenny Carr tape are added to the original
LDEO seismic time of 8:46:26, the result is 8:46:35, the exact FAA impact time for AA Flt 11.
And although anecdotal, it is also intriguing that the FAA’s 9:03:14 for UA Flt 175 matches closely
to the time of 9:03:17 found in the recent Vanity Fair article by Michael Bronner.
Link: Vanity Fair article by Michael Bronner This 9:03:17 time occurred when NEADS received
the call notifying them of a 2nd possible hijacking while “almost simultaneously” people in the
NEADS control room watched Flt 175 crash into WTC2 on CNN, including Colonel Marr, the
commanding officer. This adds credibility to the Commission’s impact time of 9:03:11.
Nevertheless, although the 9/11 Commission referred to this FAA Summary many times in its Final
Report, it still based its impact times upon all the data they had and issued impact times of 8:46:40
Within the flight path studies by the National Transportation Safety Board are found approximate
impact times of 8:46:40 and 9:02:40.
Link: NTSB report, "Flight Path Study-American Airlines Flight 11," Feb. 19, 2002
Link: NTSB report, "Flight Path Study-United Airlines 175," Feb. 19, 2002
These reports, as a matter of course, state times of impact as approximate, this done with an
understanding that higher authority will review all data in determining actual times of impact.
The 9/11 Commission’s impact time of 8:46:40 for AA Flt 11 is the same as is found in the NTSB
report that the Commission referred to in its Note 39.
The Commission referred to the NTSB report for the impact time of UA Flt 175 in its Note 51, but
even in doing so, it rejected the NTSB’s approximate 9:02:40 time and issued instead 9:03:11 as the
When one examines the radar graph from the study on AA Flt 11, it can be seen there was one last
radar position-plot at the end. This coincides with testimony by Controller Dave Bottiglia who
tracked AA Flt 11 that morning: This is from an article that covers this: “It was now being tracked
by New York Centre, where a controller, Dave Bottiglia, saw it disappear from his screen just before
8.47. It had ploughed into the World Trade Centre's north tower.”
Link: Controller Dave Bottiglia, AA Flt 11 Disappears From Radar
Reference is now made to the original source data used by the 9/11 Commission when analyzing the
impact time supplied by the NTSB flight path study for AA Flight 11. Examination of this and
particularly the radar graph supplied by magnification of the ending point area shows the last radar
return from the aircraft before impact at 08.46.40.
Page 8 from 11 speaks for it selves, and NIcon also pointed at this:
NIST used false logic in doing this 5-second addition. It is wrong. Adding 5 seconds is sleight-of-hand
statistics, a non sequitur that is meaningless. The 9:02:59 is from a discrete event with a time
set derived from TV stations (one type of source). The other time of 8:46:25 is from another distinct
event derived from seismic data (another type of source). These then are two detached time sets for
two separate events from two different source types. Therefore, the adding of 5 seconds can not be
done according to either logic or statistics. (In accounting this type of error is known as “mixing
apples with oranges”.) Therefore, the NIST 8:46:30 “Adjusted Time from Television Broadcasts”,
for their first aircraft “impact”, is not real. To reiterate: the NIST 8:46:30 a.m. time labeled as “First
aircraft impact” under the column “Adjusted Time from Television Broadcasts” is artificial.
AA Flt 11
2001 LDEO 8:46:26 Original seismic
2004 NIST 8:46:30 Artificial
2001 FAA 8:46:35 Rejected by Commission
2002 NTSB 8:46:40
2004 Commission 8:46:40
UA Flt 175
2002 NTSB 9:02:40 Rejected by Commission
2001 LDEO 9:02:54 Original seismic
2004 NIST 9:02:59 Adjusted per TV
2004 Commission 9:03:11
2001 FAA 9:03:14 Rejected by Commission
This is also recommended reading i.m.o. :
NIST's determination of 8:46:30 time of first “impact” is artificial. It is not only erroneous, but may
be specious if time manipulation is the motive. This phony time for AA Flt 11 is directly
contradicted by the statement made by the NTSB and is not supported by the radar data supplied by
the NTSB. The last radar signal from the aircraft before impact was received at 8:46:40, ten seconds
after the time that NIST now says is when the aircraft impacted the Tower. One wonders again if the
NIST 2005 contract with Dr. Kim to re-analyze the seismic times is also an attempt at time
manipulation in order to find credibility for the bogus 8:46:30 NIST time. An audit by independent
seismological experts to determine the authenticity of the revised seismic times would be in order to
resolve this matter. It would be worth doing as this concerns the mass murder of nearly 3,000
This excerpt is for NIcon, who searches for the same 4 data sets of television stations :
NIST suffers a lack of credibility for its issuance of the false 8:46:30 “impact” time for AA Flt 11. It
is an unreal time and is not an impact. What is needed from NIST are: (1) the names of the four
television stations whose data was used, (2) the actual times of impact from these four stations, and
(3) the procedures used by each station in the regular synchronization process to UTC.
Regarding UA Flt 175, a question remains: What are the main specifics that the Commission based
its time of 9:03:11 on, those that go to the heart of their Note 130? The Commission based it on
something, as one doesn’t just come up with such a precise number out of thin air. “FAA radar data
and air traffic control software logic” needs to be elaborated upon. Something is behind this time,
and if this something is credible, this would confirm once and for all the large time-gap between
seismic and impact, and would be another conclusive demand for a new investigation. Nevertheless,
until the specifics become known, the 9:03:11 remains the official time of impact, and this by itself
demands a new investigation.
Regarding AA Flt 11, there still remains a huge 11 - 14 second time-differential between the
precision times of seismic & impact. This time-gap, along with the many corroborating WTC1
basement eyewitnesses and fire department personnel, demands a new investigation now, and this
can not be emphasized or stressed any stronger.
In closing, I advice to read Furlong and Ross’s Conclusion.
And Seymour, I think that this adds enough “reasonable doubt” to your argumentation about a 12 seconds retention time.
I believe these 17 seconds retention time is quite specific, if one regards the explanation of dr. Kim of how they calculated over the years before 9/11 how the earth’s crust reacted on seismic disturbances.