posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 09:24 AM
Originally posted by ThePostExaminer
More lies. Prove that the RADES data has been "altered"
Never said the RADES data was "altered". I said the P4T cartoon screen capture of the RADES data is altered. Not for me to prove one way or the other.
I'm not introducing a cartoon as evidence of anything.
Now, are you finished with your childish games which only go to show that 6 years ago I was foolish enough to listen to P4T and CIT? Is there anything
specific in the cartoon you are trying to promote, or did you just post the video out of curiosity?
Oh, but if you want "proof" that the 84 RADES screen shots are altered, then download the data and RS3 software and look at it for yourself. Don't
look to me (you would not believe me anyways) to show you, educate yourself and stop being led around by P4T or anyone else for that matter.
But, just to clarify, the NEADS data is "altered" from norm. I was 100% right about that.
Keep in mind, that is NEADS radar data, not 84 RADES. The SEADS data was fine. It was Dennis Cimino of P4T who told me it was due to target insertion.
However, when I decided to stop listening to P4T and approached two independent PhD types in electrical engineering, they told me a different story.
They said it "could be a number of things related to processor architecture including multiprocessor issues”. So, I went to the source:
Jeff Richardson, email dated November 19, 2008 11:14 AM
“Raw radar data does not have time associated with it. The radar data is assumed to be real-time (or near real-time) upon input into the military
command and control systems and/or the FAA ATC systems. The 84 RADES data recorders time stamp the data as the data is recorded at the ADSs [Air
Defense Sectors]. I'm not sure what our timing source was in 2001 (NTP, GPS, or ?) but a precise timing method was used to periodically update our
recorders and keep them time synched. There evidently was problem with the way our NEADS recorder time was being updated as seen in the 25 second late
timing during the 911 event. Without periodic time updates, our data recorders internal time it used which we found can drift considerably. Since 911
we have changed the architecture of our recorders to prevent the time drift.”
Darn, they tell me the same thing the PhD's did. So the "alteration" is to the time stamp, not the raw data (as evidenced by the SEADS data). So
instead of being "proof" of false signal generation as I was told by the P4T "experts", it was simply a case of a bad microprocessor clock that was
generating the time stamp for NEADS. So yes, "altered", but not a nefarious alteration.
edit on 20-7-2012 by 911files because: (no reason