Balsamo wrong again - NTSB map rotation

Originally posted by Caustic Logic

So they've made you my assassin, eh? It's NOT pointless. The point is Rob almost certainly knew the "north plot data" didn't exist, or shold have known it anyway, but insisted it was real until it was undeniable. And then just silence with no admission, covered by rips on me for being willing to admit the FEW times I've bee undeniably wrong. That's telling.

PFT reports on the data. Period. They do not theorize. CIT theorizes but only based on hard data that we have personally obtained or verified.

There is no proof that you are correct in your claim of map rotation but it does not change the fact that the NTSB released an animation that contradicts the FDR and shows a north heading.

PFT is not required to explain WHY they did this or to accept your speculation in this regard. They merely reported the facts.

What's intellectually dishonest on your part is the fact that you are running around with an arrogant alter ego proclaiming that it's "over" or that you have "won" this discussion when the FDR still fatally contradicts the physical damage and the eyewitnesses still prove the plane was on the north side.

I know how bad you want to "win" this argument in favor of the official story but you are certainly NOT "winning" despite your empty declarations.

It has never been used for much explicitly, of course. Could that be because it was too useful to ignore but too tentative to put much weight on? It's a small part, but a part nonetheless, of the larger puzzle.

Huh? It's because we understand and present the facts while you try your hardest to obfuscate them. The NTSB did release an animation contradictory to the FDR and the eyewitnesses did see the plane fly on the north side. PFT and CIT simply reported it. No matter how you slice it or spin it NONE of it supports the official story.

I know this frustrates you to no end but it is undeniable.

And he admited that his libelous title of this thread was unwarranted

Did not. Sorry for any misunderstanding - I conceded the title was personalized to get Rob's attention. Libel:
en.wikipedia.org...
Anything false? If not, the only thing damage is that he didn't catch the error himself, or pretended not to. And that's not my fault. I even prodded and got no response, so I expose. The thread and even title are warranted by these facts, but I guess a title change is fair enough. Hasn't happened tho... I guess being a CM doesn't give you asmuch influence as I thought.

He was not "wrong". The title of the thread is incorrect and is an attack on Rob's credibility as a researcher so it is therefore libelous. You DID admit this. Whether or not your analysis as to HOW they created the alleged error is correct (which I am not conceding) that doesn't change what the animation shows. The animation is what it is. The NTSB is a government entity and it is not Rob's place or your place to say that what they released is merely an "honest mistake".

You are saying this about the ASCE report and the Purdue animation as well. You simply justify all officially reported contradictions away no matter how fatal as if there is no chance of deception on the part of government entities.

This is 100% contradictory behavior for someone who claims to believe that 9/11 was an inside job.

It's always about you, isn't it? In fact I decided to join for other reasons, reading the old forum threads, and saw you guys had been banned just as I found the new forum and scanned it before signing up. It had been like a week. It's actually a coincidence tho I don't expect you to believe that. I do appreciate and am exploiting the dynamic there, but I half regret you aren't there. I thought you would be when I decided "time to sign up."

Now you are lying. You have been straight up sourcing the LCF in your blog all month and even referenced a post Aldo made back in March!

Aldo “Merc” Marquis, CIT co-founder and proponent of Witness/FDR northiness, said in March “I don't believe [the data] came from the Northside flyover military plane that the witnesses saw. I believe the data is faked to try and match the Northside Citgo path somewhat, for whatever reasons they chose. Either way, we win.”

That's quite a few months of back reading to do in a single week for a forum that you supposedly just found out about. The "new" forum is about a year old by now and I simply do not buy the notion that you haven't read it at all until about a week ago. Your blog says otherwise.

Nope. All the same info and beliefs. I'm not sure why I'm more aggro there. It's a different dynamic. It's a bit too easy so far, and I'm just feeling it out. It might be too boring to stay there myself.

This response doesn't even make sense. You have a COMPLETELY different persona. You are either being manipulative or are certified schizophrenic.

Keep on guessing, man.
BTW: sorry I said "assassin above." That was a bit melodramatic. I should have said "handler."

I doubt he is Caustic Logic/Adam Larson who isn't very bright.

We keep him at bay over at ATS and he usually caves pretty easily.

z9.invisionfree.com...

Has it ever occurred to you that the main reason I "cave" so much is because I don't have THE TIME for your BS?

See? I didn't even believe it was you! That's how incredibly different you are acting. You cave easily because you are WRONG and we prove it.

You are acting like a bully on LCF because we are not there to put you in your place.

Don't have the time! That's a joke. You always find the time to reply here, create an alter ego to post with there, and continuously create your convoluted, useless, neutralizing, vapid blogs as the Frustrated Fraud.

Since your schizophrenia has clearly kicked in high gear I think I will choose to call you the Frustrated Fraud from here on out for simplicity's sake.




[edit on 28-9-2007 by Craig Ranke CIT]

The title of the thread is incorrect and is an attack on Rob's credibility as a researcher so it is therefore libelous.

a RESEARCHER??? Bwahahahahha. Craig, I give you credit for not selling PENTACON coffee mugs. Rob is not researching anything but how to earn a quick buck and making threats to those that do not agree with him.

Originally posted by CaptainObvious

The title of the thread is incorrect and is an attack on Rob's credibility as a researcher so it is therefore libelous.

a RESEARCHER??? Bwahahahahha. Craig, I give you credit for not selling PENTACON coffee mugs. Rob is not researching anything but how to earn a quick buck and making threats to those that do not agree with him.

You offer nothing to this discussion but ridicule and arguments from incredulity.

There is nothing wrong with Rob funding his foundation any way he can but he most certainly is a researcher as well as a pilot.

I can only imagine the incredible level of disinfo that would linger about the FDR if PFT wasn't out there to set the record straight.

Why do you think the Frustrated Fraud won't blog about this and continues to pretend like he is exposing information about the north heading on the NTSB animation?

reply to post by Craig Ranke CIT


A man that makes money off of the deaths of thousands of Americans is sickening. PERIOD. Thats what he does. That and spreading lies.

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
reply to post by Craig Ranke CIT

 

A man that makes money off of the deaths of thousands of Americans is sickening. PERIOD. Thats what he does. That and spreading lies.

Yeah well I think that anonymous posters on internet forums that attack patriots who are fighting for JUSTICE for the said victims are the sickening ones.

Jrefer=scum.

reply to post by Craig Ranke CIT


I got my information not from Jref...but from screwloose change. Funny...I did see your name at Jref... you used to post there. Does that mean your scum too?

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
There is no proof that you are correct in your claim of map rotation but it does not change the fact that the NTSB released an animation that contradicts the FDR and shows a north heading.

PFT is not required to explain WHY they did this or to accept your speculation in this regard. They merely reported the facts.

And none of these experts can figure out HOW they plotted this error? Nobody's required to explain anything, of course, but I took the hard facts they first reported and decided to explain it anyway.

[QUOTE]What's intellectually dishonest on your part is the fact that you are running around with an arrogant alter ego proclaiming that it's "over" or that you have "won" this discussion when the FDR still fatally contradicts the physical damage and the eyewitnesses still prove the plane was on the north side.[/QUOTE]

There's either contradictory data or a timeline error. I'm still agnostic on that point and take pains to affirm the oddity each time I debunk something else. I am by no means hiding from the fact. And two screen names does not an alter-ego make. You should know that, Jack.

[QUOTE]I know how bad you want to "win" this argument in favor of the official story but you are certainly NOT "winning" despite your empty declarations.[/QUOTE]

Projecting.

[QUOTE]

It has never been used for much explicitly, of course. Could that be because it was too useful to ignore but too tentative to put much weight on? It's a small part, but a part nonetheless, of the larger puzzle.

Huh? It's because we understand and present the facts while you try your hardest to obfuscate them. The NTSB did release an animation contradictory to the FDR and the eyewitnesses did see the plane fly on the north side. PFT and CIT simply reported it. No matter how you slice it or spin it NONE of it supports the official story. [/QUOTE]

True enough. Your witness accounts do not match the evidence, nor does the map rotation. But they do match each other...

[QUOTE]
I know this frustrates you to no end but it is undeniable.
[/QUOTE]

Do you think that antagonizes me, your turning my blog mane around on me? Oh you are a silly man.

He was not "wrong". The title of the thread is incorrect and is an attack on Rob's credibility as a researcher so it is therefore libelous. You DID admit this.

This is false, and perhaps I should sue YOU for libel, incorrectly accusing me of lying to harm Rob's reputation i order to hurt my reputation as a researcher. I'm sure I won't but from that righ there I think I could. I showed the truth to hurt Rob's credibility as a researcher." BIG difference. There is no north path DATA. There is only north path illusion. In the FDR anyway, elsewhere is another story.

[QUOTE]Whether or not your analysis as to HOW they created the alleged error is correct (which I am not conceding)[/QUOTE]

Did I show the truth or not? I got the phone book handy, opened to L... But Seriously. Please retract "libel."

[QUOTE] that doesn't change what the animation shows. The animation is what it is. The NTSB is a government entity and it is not Rob's place or your place to say that what they released is merely an "honest mistake".[/QUOTE]

Where did I ever conclude it was an honest mistake? I only showed it was a mistake. If in fact it was a calculated mistake, and it matches your witnesses partly... well, you can see where this could get weird.

[QUOTE]You are saying this about the ASCE report and the Purdue animation as well. You simply justify all officially reported contradictions away no matter how fatal as if there is no chance of deception on the part of government entities.[/QUOTE]

Oh, I love this one. Who first decided "columns 15-17" were intact? The ASCE.

Now this is opinion but well-founded opinion - but I'm pretty sure they are wrong.

ASCE info, misinfo, or disinfo?

So either they're right here, or it's an honest mistake, or they're handing us mystery biscuits to keep us stupid. It's either info, which you take it as, or misinfo, which means an "honest mistake," or it's subtle disinfo meant to throw us off track. Then who decides to keep arguing these "intact columns" preclude a 757? You and Aldo and Dick, and whoever else.
[QUOTE]This is 100% contradictory behavior for someone who claims to believe that 9/11 was an inside job.[/QUOTE]
Well, I wouldn't necessarily go that far, but since I'm just quoting you...

Now you are lying. You have been straight up sourcing the LCF in your blog all month and even referenced a post Aldo made back in March!

I don't blame you for seeing this, but I'd admit it if it were true, Craig. Please don't call me a liar without proof. Yes, I've read parts before and cited them - I do Google searches. It's not my fault you got yourself booted (or whatever, driven out by OCT supporters blah blah) right before I happened to sign up.

Here's how: I decided to sign up at the old form, inspired by some thread I read there, I forget which one, and only then noticed I was the only member online and the forum had moved. So I got redirected to the new forum but unable to access my account, so I created a new one. Somewhere in there, I was waiting to see if my code came in the e-mail, and browsing the new forum. Then, whoa! they're banned. Huh. Weird times. It was mid-process.

I'm sure you see 'politics' in this, and I can't deny that subconcious motives (Russ there, you gone, etc) probably influenced me at least subconsciously, as I learned of them and then made my screen name (can these be changed? I'll ask around).

Anyway, I don't even owe you that. This is my right and my prerogative. I can join any forum I wat any time for any reason. Keep pushing your conspiracy theory of you like. (PS Russell didn't even answer the PM I sent.)

Nope. All the same info and beliefs. I'm not sure why I'm more aggro there. It's a different dynamic. It's a bit too easy so far, and I'm just feeling it out. It might be too boring to stay there myself.

This response doesn't even make sense. You have a COMPLETELY different persona. You are either being manipulative or are certified schizophrenic.
[...] You are acting like a bully on LCF because we are not there to put you in your place.

Craig, it's clear, I am being manipluative. To manipulate means to work something with your hands, or to work something anyway. I do have strategies, that's how you win arguments. It's just more effective when you have the facts on your side as well, so you call it "bullying." Nice try. You can say I'm trying to get free reign there with you gone, but you know you couldn't post your own thoughts there any better than Terrorcell does for you. Okay, it's a slight disadvantage, but you are effectively still at the forum and I am never kept at bay except where and when I chose to be.

Keep on guessing, man.
BTW: sorry I said "assassin above." That was a bit melodramatic. I should have said "handler."

I doubt he is Caustic Logic/Adam Larson who isn't very bright.

We keep him at bay over at ATS and he usually caves pretty easily.

z9.invisionfree.com...

Has it ever occurred to you that the main reason I "cave" so much is because I don't have THE TIME for your BS?

Don't have the time! That's a joke. You always find the time to reply here, create an alter ego to post with there, and continuously create your convoluted, useless, neutralizing, vapid blogs as the Frustrated Fraud.

Oh I have time alright, just only so much (notice I haven't been updating the blog much) and only so much of that, as I said, to respond to your provocations. I'm still spending, and on your case, but I chose the way it's spent, not you. I'm just letting you know I have limited time for nickle-and-dime arguments.

Since your schizophrenia has clearly kicked in high gear I think I will choose to call you the Frustrated Fraud from here on out for simplicity's sake.

Knock yerself out, It's clever.

[edit on 30-9-2007 by Caustic Logic]

updates:

So Rob could never counter my findings.

My findings look better with better math:
More exact animation approach - 79° real
FDR ground track true - more accurate at 61.2°
Animation grid rotation: likely 10.08° CCW (magnetic as real north)
Final map rotation relative to global grid: still ~7° CCW
Total final map rotation from reality ~17.08° CCW
Apparent heading seen on-screen 79° real
79°-17.08° = 61.92°
This matches the FDR ground track true 61.2° with a margin of error I’ll call 0.72°. Not bad for an incoherent janitor, huh?


Recently I posted parts 1 + 2 of a video series explaining the issue. (Part 3 will explain the map rotation, but it's not done yet). These are compiled here:
that darn NTSB cartoon

Rob pops in and tells me I'm "cherry picking" and that "we have been saying the "map may be rotated" since Aug 2006.”
So I did some research and came up with this:
A cherry pie from Rob's Orchard
Anybody care to check these statements of his for a pattern? Or to help him out by showing where has said "the map may BE rotated," not "we once thought that but..."
(understand the difference first between visual path altered and heading dial altered - all in that link).

Thanks.


[edit on 12-4-2008 by Caustic Logic]

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
A man that makes money off of the deaths of thousands of Americans is sickening. PERIOD. Thats what he does. That and spreading lies.

Speaking of spreading lies and being sickining, is the people that spread the lies of the official story instead of finding the truth of what happened that day out of respect for the poeple that died that day.

reply to post by Caustic Logic


Yep, the map was rotated under the aircraft path wrong. Nice numbers. Why is Rob trying to tie witnesses to a working copy by the NTSB? when is vid 3 going to be out?

Originally posted by beachnut
reply to post by Caustic Logic

 

Yep, the map was rotated under the aircraft path wrong. Nice numbers. Why is Rob trying to tie witnesses to a working copy by the NTSB? when is vid 3 going to be out?

Mmm, soon and sooner now that people are watching. A week or so... lotta graphics to update... will post it here.

BTW, I can think of no honest mistake normal reason to turn the map 7 degrees CCW relative to any grid. That's not a backwards mag correction as I and others had speculated on... it's weird.

Oh, and for anyone wondering the basic case is laid out on page 1 of this thread. The above numbers offer better results, but the concept is the same.

Also I'll add this:
Some might wonder how what seems a slight rotation relative to the animation's ground grid could produce a roughly 20 degree error. To understand this, you need to understand that the grid is NOT oriented to true north-south, but magnetic. Anyone can test this.

1) Open the video. Put a post-it note over the heading indicator (bottom dial on the right that reads 300 at the runway).
ETA: video link
2) Now fast-forward to some spot where you think you can gauge the plane's heading relative to the ground lines. Understand on its out-bound flight it roughly parallels the E-W latitude lines. Find a spot where it appears totally parallel, which should indicate a REAL heading of 270 degrees (due west). Considering the heading dial is reading magnetic, and magnetic north was about 10 degrees west of true, we should see in the dial 280 degrees.
3) Take off the post-it note. It's reading 270 magnetic isn't it? This means 260 real and the grid is reading magnetic as north.
4) Re-cover the dial and try it again when it appears lines up parallel to longitude lines in the south turn around "13:00". What looks like 180 real reads 180 mag don't it?
5) Try again on the in-bound flight where parallel should mean 90 real, 100 mag. It'll say 90.
6) Try anywhere you'd like to guess the heading and you'll get the same result if you're doing it right.

So the final map lining up with the grid as some have pointed out (no need to name names anymore) would be a problem. But it doesn't, it's rotated - If it were turned the right, correcting way, that'd fix the error. Instead it's turned the other way which makes the problem worse, to the tune of it being north of the Citgo.

typos

[edit on 13-4-2008 by Caustic Logic]

Pilots For Truth on WTPRN - 03/30/08

We cover the map rotation as we have in almost every interview we have done.

Here is an email we sent to a reply regarding this question awhile back.

Map rotation is pretty much what we been saying since day 1 and have said on almost every radio and TV interview. We thought the map was rotated when we first got the animation, that is why we worked on altitude, vertical speed, system indications of impact (or lack of).. etc etc, initially. The flight path is secondary and the amount of time we spend on it reflect this (~7 min clip in PBB2). All the other issues are primary. CIT are the ones establishing flight path through witnesses. We did briefly look into the rotation while we were working on PBB3, and matched up lat/long parallels, which it appeared the map was not rotated, and eventually were going to look into it more thoroughly. But since CIT has found new witnesses to a DRA (Down The River) approach, i dont think we are going to bother much more with the flight path and leave that up to the people who were there and actually saw it.

Although the full set of CIT witnesses do not match the full FDR path, we later included the flight path in our "Questions to the US Govt" on our pentagon page because there are many independent north side witnesses (we wouldnt have even bothered with the flight path had there not been any NOC witnesses).

The professionals at the NTSB just dont "rotate" maps by mistake. They do these types of animations on a regular basis. Since there are so many NOC witnesses, perhaps someone (a whistleblower?) at the NTSB rotated the map intentionally to get people looking into a north of citgo approach? Who knows....

Another interesting thing is some claim the map is rotated at the pentagon hole being the pivot point. Why is the pivot point not in the center of the picture? Seems someone went out of there way here to show a north approach if in fact the map is rotated. Initially we thought the flight path to be a red herring, that is why we concentrated on the other parameters first. Once we realized there were witnesses to a northern approach, we included the flight path among the other questions to the NTSB/FBI regarding altitude, vertical speed and so on... which can be found at pilotsfor911truth.org...

If the NTSB/FBI does, by some miracle, respond one day saying the map is rotated, we will then ask why are there so many North Of Citgo witnesses? ... and further ask, why are there DRA witnesses including Mineta and Monte...? :-)

Review Claim 5 and Claim 7 here.
pilotsfor911truth.org...

Specifically this quote from Claim 7.

"The NTSB notes in the cover letter that they want everything as accurate as possible when providing information through the FOIA, however they note one error which was made to the clock annotation. They do not account for any other possible errors regarding the animation in this cover letter."

Hope this helps,

Feel free to quote it if you need it.

To put this in perspective... CL, you have 1147 views of this thread (as of this post) in over a half a year, which you admit was titled to slander "in order to get my attention", add another 100 or so vews from your new videos, and perhaps even less on your blog (going by YT views linked from your blog and here). We do 1000+ views in less than 6 hours on a slow day (which doesnt include radio/TV interviews). But hey, keep up the great work!

Regards,
Rob

reply to post by johndoex


Rob, how's that math coming along? Been over a month now. Any progress?

Originally posted by Caustic Logic
I admit now I've been over-reaching and I'm sick of it too.

CL, you should take your own advice from last year on page one of this thread. I briefly skimmed through it again. You should too. Especially after your claims you made last year.


Too funny..

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
reply to post by johndoex

 

Rob, how's that math coming along? Been over a month now. Any progress?

Its coming.. lots of progress. Thanks for asking, but of course i had to report you for off topic.

Regards..

Originally posted by johndoex
Pilots For Truth on WTPRN - 03/30/08

You Must Be Logged in For Full Forum Access. Log In here. Not Registered? Register here. Thank you.

I refue to register at your forum. Sorry. If you can't say it in the open it's no discussion I care to be a part of, and if I'm not part of the discussion why be there? Just to fish until I'm banned?

Can you just give me the date/time and/or show/host of that recent interview you asked me to hear? I went to the wtprn site and downloaded five or six shows, none with you... looked for links I could find in the open... lotsa interviews from last year... I'll listen but I'm not signing up at your forum and not wasting any more time digging blind.

Interesting e-mail. Thanks for sharing that direct. It's truly different from what I've seen of what you were saying repeatedly from late 2006 until about September last year. When did that go out?

Okay, so this thread is all off because, as you say I should know, you ARE Mr. map rotation. Correct? So did you ever actually believe then the plane was 'plotted' north of the Citgo and the heading dial altered to show a south path? Or were you just kidding when you said that repeatedly? Or was someone impersonating you? Or what?

Thank you.

Further response later.

[typos]

[and other edits for clarity and punchiness
done 11:23 pm my time
no further edits anticipated for this post]

[edit on 14-4-2008 by Caustic Logic]

Originally posted by Caustic Logic

Originally posted by beachnut
reply to post by Caustic Logic

 

Yep, the map was rotated under the aircraft path wrong. Nice numbers. Why is Rob trying to tie witnesses to a working copy by the NTSB? when is vid 3 going to be out?

Mmm, soon and sooner now that people are watching. A week or so... lotta graphics to update... will post it here.

BTW, I can think of no honest mistake normal reason to turn the map 7 degrees CCW relative to any grid. That's not a backwards mag correction as I and others had speculated on... it's weird.

The small patch of the Pentagon, and the runway patch are the only sections the NTSB added to an aircraft only animation. The runway and Pentagon are not placed using FDR data, but manually. Proof of this is the fact 77's FDR show 77 3000 feet south of the runway. The NTSB had to place the runway under the plane on the animation.

There are four headings to choose from and they should check with each other and the winds, true heading, magnetic heading, true track, and magnetic track. The magnetic heading will not align with true or mag lines on a grid unless there are no winds animation.

It does not matter how the NTSB messed up the Pentagon, if they reversed the 9 degree variation on to his grid of true, or a true error to a magnetic grid. The 9 degree variation error gives a 17 degree offset as you found with in a degree. The simple fact is the Pentagon's orientation is arbitrary and only as accurate as the person who placed it on the working copy of an animation never used to show where 77 was going, but how the plane was moving with 6 degrees of freedom, flight.

You have done a lot of work, I guess you know all of this already. You do better work and analysis than the work you are critiquing.


video.google.com...

[edit on 14-4-2008 by beachnut]

Beachnut, a man who claims to be former USAF, with most of his posts nothing but ad homs, the rest incoherent, endorsing a janitor.


You two make a great couple.

Regards

Originally posted by johndoex
Beachnut, a man who claims to be former USAF, with most of his posts nothing but ad homs, the rest incoherent, endorsing a janitor.


You two make a great couple.

Regards

ad what? oh

Beachnut, a man who claims to be former USAF, with most of his posts nothing but ad homs, the rest incoherent, endorsing a janitor.

Irony…
Have you fixed your errors on this topic, Caustic Logic can help you. He has helped you a lot by giving you the answers. What about that 11.2 g messed up math and physics, I am sure Caustic Logic can help or see this. forums.randi.org... Always here to help you with experience and real science. Good luck. CL has got his stuff together on math and physics, he can help you correct your errors and learn?

If you do not understand my poor post, how can you decipher 9/11 information? I think you understand this post, right? Being a poor writer I understand your problem understanding me, and it seems indicative of your problem understanding 9/11.

[edit on 14-4-2008 by beachnut] I had to remove some stuff you may not understand, but if you need help see the corrections to your physics errors here forums.randi.org...

[edit on 14-4-2008 by beachnut]