NTSB released data does not match offical story

Pilots for 9/11 Truth has put out new 10 minute short addressing some of the fallacies people have been spreading regarding the FDR data.

Primarily the notion that there is no recorded data 6 seconds shy of the Pentagon.

Pilots for 9/11 Truth presents...

[SIZE=5]American 77 Flight Recorder Position Data[/SIZE]

Description:

Please view Pandora's Black Box - Chapter Two - Flight Of American 77 prior to watching this clip to get a better understanding of what is analyzed here.

Addressing common arguments of those who make excuses regarding altitude, vertical speed and position conflicts between American Airlines Flight 77 Data Recorder (Black Box) and the Govt story. The Flight Data Recorder information provided by The National Transportation Safety Board through the Freedom Of Information Act does not support the govt story. The NTSB/FBI refuse to comment. Visit pilotsfor911truth.org... for more details.

For higher quality download, please download from google page here.

Google Video Link

Thanks, it's interesting. I was wondering what Rob thought of this issue. I'm not up to figuring out his reasoning and whether or not I agree, but the DME thing sounds reasonable, and he addresses the final position issues. Lag seems reasonable. I doubt I could agree with his overall take, since I'm pretty sure by other evidence the plane was low enough to impact and did, but I'm left feeling like Rob might have a good point in there somewhere. I'll have to come back to this one later.

Originally posted by Caustic Logic
I doubt I could agree with his overall take, since I'm pretty sure by other evidence the plane was low enough to impact and did, but I'm left feeling like Rob might have a good point in there somewhere.

His "overall take" is simply that the FDR is irreconcilable with the physical damage. You have offered nothing to refute this. Whether or not you choose to continue to hold onto the notion that a 757 hit the building despite fatal contradictions such as this does not make all of the anomalies go away.

Think about where you are with this.

You are forced to acknowledge that the government provided FDR is dubious and anomalous.

You are forced to acknowledge that the eyewitnesses do not make sense with the official story to the point where you assert they all HAVE TO BE planted deep cover disinfo agents.

You are forced to suggest that the physical damage to the first floor slab is limited to a pile of rubble in front of the building and that the ASCE report is wrong.

You are forced to accept the notion that the dubious security video depicts a perfectly level approach that is physically IMPOSSIBLE in relation to the values reported in the FDR, particularly speed.

You are forced to accept the notion that a 20 to 30 foot long light pole weighing about 200 lbs. that was sent flying with the kinetic force of a 90 ton jet traveling 535 mph did not damage the hood of a car after spearing the windshield.

You are forced to reference images from well after the event in order to attribute physical damage to the "plane" that could not have been from from the plane.

You are forced to completely twist the claims of the C-130 pilot to fit with the 84 RADES data by taking specific references and assuming they were wildly generalized and inaccurate.

You will be forced to acknowledge that the plane approached from the east side of the Potomac completely destroying the NTSB flight path.

Yet you still insist on blissfully suggesting that "other evidence" still adds-up perfectly in your mind so the government story must be true.

The evidence is no longer on your side.

Logic and reason is not on your side.

Their story does not add up but you choose to vigorously defend it regardless.

Wow, i havent been to this site in quite some time. We're getting quite a bit of hits from here, thanks for posting the presentation Craig.

Adam, i'd stick to being a janitor if i were you. Having little knowledge in aviation is more dangerous than having none. You have expereinced this first hand. Let me guess, you wasted your time writing up an entire piece based on Famers work regarding "6 seconds missing", and now Farmer himself has even taken it down (after banning me from commenting trying to educate him on DME). Keep up the great work guys! I think you have thoroughly discredited yourself by now.. no?

Craig... i dont know why you waste your time...

Regards,
Rob

reply to post by johndoex


Hi Rob,

Sorry to derail....I was hoping you can answer some questions that were presented to you months ago that go no response....Thank you in advance



Question 1
What has your source said about the TR?

Question 2
What has your source said about the accomplishment dates for the ECO's?

Question 3
Have you actually met your source face to face?

www.abovetopsecret.com...
...

and this:

Rob, could you tell me how the maintenance department at Independence Air did revisions of their maintenance manuals? I already know that you have absolutely no clue. Every airline has their own way of doing things. Per the FAR's they can make changes to their manuals as they see fit. In the case of the TR dated April 2007 it's for a non-safety of flight item. Something that can affect the air worthiness of the aircraft is treated differently than something that does not. As for the two people you mentioned my guess is they felt no obligation to give you anything.

Back to the TR, what has your source told you about it? Has he told you its legit or fake? Rather simple question Rob, if you do not answer that is an admission that it’s legitimate

www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 4-2-2008 by CaptainObvious]

Captain Obvious,

Thanks for your questions.

Nice avatar.. it suits you well.

Why havent you emailed us these questions? Our email is on the botom of every page of our site. Why do you choose to derail a topic which completely blows away every argument against Flight Data Recorder analysis?


I know you prefer to derail such an important topic. However, if you email us these questions (which you avoid to do), i will be more than happy to give you my personal phone number to discuss your questions on a recorded call, email it to you unedited, and then you can post it anywhere you like.

I will await your email. For now, can you please stick to topic?

reply to post by johndoex


Rob,

I will not contact you directly. sorry. This is the internet. I do not know you nor do I want you to obtain any of my information besides what I may share on a thread such as this. I have reposted the questions on the appropriate thread and look forward to your response.

Sorr Craig for the derail,

C.O.

Your confidence in putting your name behind your argument speaks volumes.

Thanks for sticking to topic.

reply to post by johndoex


Sorry Rob, your past speaks WONDERS for you with your threats to other skeptics.

I bumped the Airphone thread so Craig can have this back.

Thanks,

C.O.

CO,

I know you prefer to attack personal character through cherry picking posts on the web... rather than the argument... while hiding behind your screen. Its typical...

But unlike you.. i actually put my face, name and professional reputation on my arguments...

patriotsquestion911.com...

Im in good company it appears (keep an eye on that site an our core member list as it hasnt been updated in awhile and many need to be added). It appears you lack confidence in your arguments.

Finally, your questions have already been answered by members of your own team (anonymous "debunkers") who actually work for the airlines. Stand up and put your name, face and professional reputation on your argument as i have.. as we have... and perhaps i will respect what you have to say. Until then.. well.. i think you know where you stand.

Stick to topic please.

Why arent you shocked that the top arguments from so-called "debunkers" have completely fallen apart with the above presentation? I know, you prefer to derail the topic instead with questions from months ago, which you have refused to email to us. How do you look yourself in the mirror?

reply to post by johndoex


Rob,

I'm not sure why you are continuing on posting on this thread....I apologized for it, then asked that you answer the questions on the thread that the questions originated from. I prefer to keep my personal information just that... personal. You won't answer the questions presented to you months ago. If you were SO confident in your work, you would respond to the questions.

I kindly ask that you go to this thread and answer the questions presented to you.

Thank you once again,

C.O.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
I prefer to keep my personal information just that... personal.

I dont blame you with the arguments you make....

You won't answer the questions presented to you months ago.

Oh.. but i have.. i just answer to those i respect. Did you fail to realize the growth at pilotsfor911truth.org... ? Ask yourself, how does such an organization grow if i am such a threatening individual?

Again.. keep a close eye on it as we have a major update coming soon.

CO, you have earned zero respect from me. I actually prefer you keep up your feeble attacks

If you were SO confident in your work, you would respond to the questions.

If you were so confident in your arguments. You would email us the questions and not wait months till i sign back on to ATS in order to derail a thread. Isnt that against ATS rules?

I kindly ask that you go to this thread and answer the questions presented to you.

I'll answer to anyone who asks with their name and face. I will not answer to those who have zero confidence in their argument nor have the ability to research the answers over several months. I assure you, you will not like the answer. But then again, you dont have the confidence in your argument to put your name on it.

Now i ask again.. can you stick to topic? Can you answer my questions above? I put my face on my arguments. Why dont you?

Thank you once again,

C.O.

Pleasure is mine.. this is fun...

edit: fixed link

[edit on 4-2-2008 by johndoex]

reply to post by johndoex


Your link is broken. I went to your site only to find that you removed the document that I posted. (not sure if you actually posted the document) but i do remember you saying you were looking into it.

I understand what you are doing and I hope you are having fun dodging the questions that you have NOT answered.

Most people on the interent choose to remain anonomous for good reason... They do not trust what is on the other end. Remember making death threats to Mark Roberts? Anyone that talks about killing another human is not the type of person I want to know on a personal basis. If you can't respect this, oh well.

You have a chance to answer a few rather simple questions. I am guessing i will not get the answers.


EDIT .. i see you fixed your link.... I'll take a peek

[edit on 4-2-2008 by CaptainObvious]

And theres the rub.... how did i know that was coming. CO, you never played poker before.. have you.... check raise.. and you lose...

Yes CO, those who are paranoid take your stance. You are derailing the thread further with the "death threats" cherry picking once again. I have explained this to you before, but instead you choose to derail further, cherry pick, obfuscate, and spin. Are you one of those paid pentagon bloggers?

I have spoken with Ron Weick (host of Hardfire) and Pat Turley (author of Screw Loose CHange) numerous times.. recorded. Even about this very topic. They have my phone number, address, I have theirs. They dont feel threatened. Why do you? Matter of fact, i have been said to be "very pleasant". Find the quote.. its on the web.. your specialty..

CO, keep up the good work. You only discredit yourself. You deserve zero respect. But hey.. keep asking those questions behind your screen waiting for me to answer because you lack confidence.. fear for your personal security.. or whatever...

Now.. can you stick to topic.. how many times have i asked?

Anyone who would like to report CO... feel free. Im kinda guessing the anonymous "CO" has been suspended before for derailing topics.. it seems it may be what he/she/it is paid to do? Just a guess...

Regards,
Rob