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.
Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
reply to post by pinch
I'm not following you Pinch.
Why does your head hurt?
My head hurts from trying to follow all your conflicting BS.
Sean Boger said he watched the aircraft hit the building.
Terry Morin said he watched the tail hit the building and most certainly did not see an aircraft bank off to the right to be seen by Roosevelt Roberts.
Numerous others saw the impact but you choose to ignore their testimony, claiming some BS about being part of the government,
which is indeed BS because Lagasse,, Brooks and Roberts are all government employees. Therefore, you *do* accept government employee testimony, but only testimony you like can can gerrymander into a twisted shadow of its former meaning.
For Officer Roberts to see an aircraft at 50 to 100 feet over the south parking as you claim as evidence for a "fly-over" the aerodynamic flight regime the aircraft would have to go through from a north of the service station is impossible.
The flight path denoted on your pictures don't match - some go over the annex, some clip one corner of the annex, some go down the north side of the annex, some come from over Arlington Cemetery, etc.
The "video" you keep referring to by Captain Bob is nothing more than a cartoon. In the professional world of modeling and simulation, no model or simulation is acceptable by anyone until it is verified as accurate, validated as generating data that is correct and is accredited by an outside competent authority. Captain Bob's cartoon has had none of the above done, so it remains a quaint little version of what he thinks happened, something I'm sure all you are very proud of but nonetheless nothing more than a cartoon.
THAT is why my head hurts.
I understand your and Captain Bob's appeal is to the uneducated, the masses who know nothing about aviation or aerodynamics or flight dynamics or anything such as that.
Captain Bob is especially qualified to speak on these issues because he himself is uneducated about flight departure procedures(specifically at Andrews AFB) and approach procedures (specifically at Reagan National). Something about the blind wishing to recruit the blind, or something like that.
You can do you little hand waving of sweetness and light and "Peace, brother!" and BS routine all you want, but the fact remains you have nothing, you have developed nothing, you will do nothing, and you will remain nothing in this event.
Your "independent" investigations is made up leading questions, cherry picked witness statements, outright lies, speculation, putting words in people's mouths, attribution of thought, and pure and simple bull crap.
The fact that you and Captain Bob won't ever, ever actually "do" anything with this "evidence" you claim is indicative of your real motives and feelings here - you are scared to death of taking this to a courtroom anywhere, and you'd rather extend your questionable 15-minutes of quasi-internet fame as long as you possibly can, even though that fame is relegated to nothing more than online discussion boards (and in the editorial rooms of the OC Weekly).
Peace, bro! Peace through superior firepower, that is!
BTW, how's Alpo? Haven't heard from him much lately.
The "video" you keep referring to by Captain Bob is nothing more than a cartoon. In the professional world of modeling and simulation, no model or simulation is acceptable by anyone until it is verified as accurate, validated as generating data that is correct and is accredited by an outside competent authority.
Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
The "video" you keep referring to by Captain Bob is nothing more than a cartoon. In the professional world of modeling and simulation, no model or simulation is acceptable by anyone until it is verified as accurate, validated as generating data that is correct and is accredited by an outside competent authority.
Really? Who "verified" these?
So then these were "verified as accurate, validated as generating data that is correct and is accredited by an outside competent authority"?
Originally posted by beachnut
Middleton points to the south path, did you watch your own video? He pointed to south of the CITGO, he points south. Good job, you confirmed the government story.
Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
It is IMPOSSIBLE for the plane to have hit according to where the witnesses unanimously place it.
Joseph Royster "I was on the street driving, and then the plane went over the top of my car, just over the treetops ... It was a big aircraft just on its course."
Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
reply to post by beachnut
Many of the north side accounts described the same banking north side approach to the Center for Military History only weeks after the event.
Why do you keep ignoring this fact?
Originally posted by beachnut That is over an 89 degree bank! But it has to be two reversing turns, one left at over 63 Gs, and one to the right to fly down Middleton's path another 63 Gs, and over 89 degrees of bank; air show stuff, just short of the old aerobatics definition I grew up with. My flying heritage goes back to when Curtis taught my distant cousin to fly; you should have consulted with me first. We could have cleared up these false recollections on the spot!
How many g's can a human take before they blackout?
In: Science
the healthy human body with some practice at pulling g, could withstand only a few seconds at more than 10 g before passing out from lack of blood flow to the brain. Or, more aptly, the lack of oxygen to feed the brain that only blood flow could provide. The heart can only beat against so much pressure before it losses the battle. Rookies couldn't hope to withstand more than about 5 or 6 g before losing consciousness.
Who did it? with holograms and planted evidence.
Originally posted by billybob
really/
maybe your heritage is senile.
... are talking out your exhaust?
your argument is moot.
FABRICATED "physics" numbers in the universe won't change that.
IF witnesses saw a plane knock over light poles, it was either their imagination or another plane or a hologram. ...
however, i KNOW that the light poles were PLANTED EVIDENCE...
SIXTY THREE G's!!!?!?!?!?!?
Originally posted by SiONiX
The scenario pointed to in this case is a northside flight path.
Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
He (Middleton) specifically says that it came:
"On the NORTH side of the Navy Annex"
And that it flew:
"Right over the top of the parking lot" of the ANC maintenance buildings which is EXACTLY what all the other witnesses including Lagasse said.
Google Video Link |
Originally posted by SiONiX
You obviously don't get his point...
It is by no means from getting the plane from witness A's path to witness B's path. It's about the collective testimony, that they all place it in a common area, which does not corroborate with the official flight path.
If 10 witnesses see a car accident, you will get 10 different versions. But all point to a common scenario.
The scenario pointed to in this case is a northside flight path.
Direct Link to Full picture
Direct Link to Full Picture
Direct Link to Full Picture here