BREAKING NEWS: Many More than 8 People at CIT Conference

Click here to learn more about this warning.

LMFAO!

Remember something John, I never changed my tune about the transients
whereas your group of 'egspurts' fell flat on their face as it was proven
by a computer program that data was not erased.

Tweet

When you can show me a reference to North side FDR data, I will allow
you to reply. Until then, take your 60 degree unfounded banking garbge
back to crackey and the gang where it belongs.

Originally posted by jthomas
It is still nonsensical for you guys to rely on the claims CIT makes when the congruence of all the evidence confirms only one conclusion, including what Sean Boger said he saw: AA77, a Boeing 757, hit the Pentagon.

Yet again, jthomas cherry-picks Boger.

Remember that before the plane that Boger saw allegedly hit the Pentagon, Boger described it on a NOC flight path. Why do you ignore this, jthomas? Why do you discount the part of Boger's testimony that you don't agree with?

jthomas cherry-picks to suit his story

jthomas, please quote Boger stating that he saw 'Flight AA77' hit the Pentagon. I might have missed it. I recall him stating that he watched a plane hit the Pentagon.

Since I know turbo will want the code for reference:

Option Explicit On
'Option Strict On
Imports System
Imports System.IO
Module fdr_functions
' Adapted from C# code developed by Warren Stutt by John Farmer
' Revised 5/15/2009
' References:
' forums.randi.org...
' www.asc.gov.tw... Figure 4.2-2

Private Const INPUT_FILE As String = "c:\aal77.fdr"
Private Const OUTPUT_FILE As String = "C:\AAL77 Hamming Codes.csv"
Private Const MARKER As Long = &H1FF
Sub Read_Hamming()

Dim fs As New FileStream(INPUT_FILE, FileMode.Open, FileAccess.Read) ' Create the file stream for input of data.
Dim sw As New StreamWriter(OUTPUT_FILE) ' Create output stream writer.

Dim b As Byte() = New Byte(1) []
Dim page As Byte() = New Byte(127) []

Dim iPageParity As Integer = 0
Dim iHammingCode As Integer = 0
Dim iShiftNum As Integer = 0
Dim iBitNum0 As Integer = 0
Dim iBitNum1 As Integer = 0
Dim iBitHammingCode As Integer = 0
Dim iPage0, iPage1 As Integer

Dim lLength As Long = fs.Length ' lLength to hold the file stream length in bytes.
Dim lTextHeaderLength As Long = 0
Dim lPageNum As Long = 0
Dim lFilePos As Long = 0
Dim lResult As Long = 0
Dim lIncrement As Long = 0

Dim sType As String = ""
Dim sHammingCodeAndPageParityCorrect As String = ""
Dim sCalculatedHammingCodeAndPageParity As String = ""
Dim sFileHammingCodeAndPageParity As String = ""
Dim sErasedPage As String = ""
Dim sTemp As String = ""

' Search through the text header at the beginning of the file until the first header or erased page is found.
While lTextHeaderLength < lLength
fs.Read(b, 0, 2)
sTemp = "&H" & Hex(b(1)

Originally posted by turbofan
LMFAO!

Remember something John, I never changed my tune about the transients
whereas your group of 'egspurts' fell flat on their face as it was proven
by a computer program that data was not erased.

Tweet

When you can show me a reference to North side FDR data, I will allow
you to reply. Until then, take your 60 degree unfounded banking garbge
back to crackey and the gang where it belongs.

Oh Turbofan, no one said it was 'erased', it is 'missing'. The 'computer program' you are refering to by Stutt has proven nothing. I have written my own version his code (C#) in VB and we simply don't know what the FDR transition data says since neither of us have cracked the Hoffman algorithm yet.

However, based on a series of very odd readings in the final recorded segment, the most likely scenario is a premature power failure. Why? I don't know and nor does anyone else at this point. There have however been some very reasonable ideas on the subject presented and the FDR thread is a good read for anyone seriously interested in the subject.

FDR Explained

Good try though and thanks for demonstrating once again you don't have a clue what you are talking about.

* I posted the VB.NET code above for you turbo. What you are talking about are the parity checks in the fdr file. No, you cannot tell if the file has been sliced and diced from this. What you can tell is whether or not there was an error in writing a particular data record or whether the buffer (erased awaiting the next data record) is an abnormal size.

[edit on 15-7-2009 by 911files]

[edit on 15-7-2009 by 911files]

Originally posted by tezzajw
jthomas, please quote Boger stating that he saw 'Flight AA77' hit the Pentagon. I might have missed it. I recall him stating that he watched a plane hit the Pentagon.

I am not jthomas, but I'll take that one.

"And then you just heard the noise, and then he just smacked into the building, and when it hit the building, I am watching the plane go all the way into the building" - page 11, NEIT 299, Nov. 14, 2001 Sean Boger

You are correct that he did not say he saw Flight AA77, but 'the plane' (later identified as flight 77).

[edit on 15-7-2009 by 911files]

[edit on 15-7-2009 by 911files]

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT

Witnesses saw it flying away.

Originally posted by trebor451

Who saw it flying away?

Besides Roosevelt Roberts, who's account cannot be corroborated and in any event is so convoluted and filled with inconsistencies to make it totally unbelievable.

Cue Jeopardy theme song.

Craig? Aldo? Preston? tezz? Ligon? Bueller? PfT Rep? Anyone?

Paging the on-call CIT/PfT Rep. You have a question in the queue.

[edit on 15-7-2009 by trebor451]

reply to post by 911files


What? You didn't bring your North side FDR data with you like I asked?



Bird strikes cause the power failure, remember?

And please don't tell me your clan of fools were not pushing the tranisient
erase theory.

Here is a quote from the "leader" himself, Ryan Mackey:

This is so fundamental that it defies belief.

Let me try an analogy. I have an answering machine with flash memory. Let's say I have a message on it, and I want to erase it. What do I normally do? ...

But that's not the only way to erase the data.

Let's say you've called me and are recording a message when lightning strikes a utility pole nearby. Suddenly there's an unusual voltage applied to the EEPROM. Since it's writing, it's already accessed a part of the EEPROM, but it sends the wrong voltage because its power supply can't deal with the spike. Of course, it's likely that lightning would simply blast it to pieces, but let's suppose the lightning strike is almost attenuated by breakers and such, so only the briefest instant of a moderate spike goes through. This spike, and the drop in power afterward, have the potential to affect other cells in the EEPROM. Instead of gently charging a gate to a preset level, all of a sudden there's a time-varying signal, and all of those little capacitances between gates that normally don't do anything react. The spike changes the state of many gates by accident. Those capacitances are always there, and define the maximum speed at which IC's can operate. They also define the IC's tolerance for line noise.

... Depends on the spike voltage, depends on blind luck.

I can also erase data by hitting it with a hammer. I can obviously damage the circuitry itself, and that will make any data unusable. But it's also possible to do it less destructively, particularly if it is writing while I clobber it....

There ya go Farmer! There you see Mackey making a fool of himself
grasping at TRANSIENTS ERASING DATA. Pay attention. Stop spreading lies. Learn something
about EEPROM tech before you dare debate me.

This should clearly show the ATS people that Farmer hasn't a clue what
he is reading and just likes the look of his text on the screen.

P.S. Thanks, but no thanks for your code. I already have a copy
through Warren Stutt who is someone more qualified to review FDR data.

[edit on 15-7-2009 by turbofan]

Originally posted by turbofan
reply to post by 911files

 

What? You didn't bring your North side FDR data with you like I asked?

Bird strikes cause the power failure, remember?

And please don't tell me your clan of fools were not pushing the tranisient
erase theory.

Here is a quote from the "leader" himself, Ryan Mackey:

This is so fundamental that it defies belief.

Let me try an analogy. I have an answering machine with flash memory. Let's say I have a message on it, and I want to erase it. What do I normally do? ...

But that's not the only way to erase the data.

Let's say you've called me and are recording a message when lightning strikes a utility pole nearby. Suddenly there's an unusual voltage applied to the EEPROM. Since it's writing, it's already accessed a part of the EEPROM, but it sends the wrong voltage because its power supply can't deal with the spike. Of course, it's likely that lightning would simply blast it to pieces, but let's suppose the lightning strike is almost attenuated by breakers and such, so only the briefest instant of a moderate spike goes through. This spike, and the drop in power afterward, have the potential to affect other cells in the EEPROM. Instead of gently charging a gate to a preset level, all of a sudden there's a time-varying signal, and all of those little capacitances between gates that normally don't do anything react. The spike changes the state of many gates by accident. Those capacitances are always there, and define the maximum speed at which IC's can operate. They also define the IC's tolerance for line noise.

... Depends on the spike voltage, depends on blind luck.

I can also erase data by hitting it with a hammer. I can obviously damage the circuitry itself, and that will make any data unusable. But it's also possible to do it less destructively, particularly if it is writing while I clobber it....

There ya go Farmer! There you see Mackey making a fool of himself
grasping at TRANSIENTS ERASING DATA. Pay attention. Stop spreading lies. Learn something
about EEPROM tech before you dare debate me.

This should clearly show the ATS people that Farmer hasn't a clue what
he is reading and just likes the look of his text on the screen.

Darn turbo, you sure wrote a lot to say nothing. Quit quoting others and say something original. What does Mackey have to do with this discussion? I cannot show you any data for AAL77 from the FDR past a point west of the Sheraton because it does not exist. I know that is hard for you to grasp, but I'm putting it as simple as I can.

[edit on 15-7-2009 by 911files]

Darn it Farmer, you said the plane required 60 degrees of bank for NoC.

Based on what? NOTHING! That's right, nothing. You don't know the
speed of the plane.

You said the fools at JokeREF were not talking abuot erasure of data...
you said it was about "missing seconds".

Wrong again. See the post.

Please go away, PLEASE.

Just to clear up the issue at hand for turbo since he seems to be off on another tangent.

1) At issue is a data file, NOT an EEPROM.
2) The data file terminates at a point west of the Pentagon based on altitude correlation of the MC values recorded by the PLA and IAD radar facilities and the full set of DME data matched to the various VOR's used along the flight path.
3) Normally, the FDR records to within a second of impact and termination of the power supply. Why the data file does not contain this data is the issue at hand, NOT what may have caused the FDR to stop recording (an entirely seperate issue).
4) A lot of people have presented rational arguments suggesting why the FDR may have lost power prematurely and it is beyond my expertise to explore those. My interest is strictly the data set represented by the raw dump file and the final position recorded.
5) The final position represented by the RO2 done by P4T, and verified by the DME and altitude values in the NTSB CSV file is west of the Sheraton, a good six seconds away from the Pentagon based on last recorded speed trends.
6) The discussion of the technical aspects of the FDR (EEPROM) is for a discussion of WHY the FDR may have stopped recording prematurely. The issue is the data represented in the resultant file. I am not interested in WHY it may or may not have failed. My interest is solely in the data it recorded prior to failure.

Originally posted by turbofan
Darn it Farmer, you said the plane required 60 degrees of bank for NoC.

Based on what? NOTHING! That's right, nothing. You don't know the
speed of the plane.

You said the fools at JokeREF were not talking abuot erasure of data...
you said it was about "missing seconds".

Wrong again. See the post.

Please go away, PLEASE.

Wrong turbo. I do know what the FDR recorded the speed as up until its final record. Based on that data and the overwhelming majority of eyewitnesses it took just a few seconds to clear the Annex area to the Pentagon. And no, I said the issue was missing data, NOT erasure of data. I can speak for myself, NOT Mackey or anyone else and nor can you.

Simple math turbo. Two required turns. One to port to deviate from the last recorded flight path and another to the starboard to clear north of the Citgo and back to the Pentagon and impact as you guys describe. Do the math for the last recorded speed trends and time to target. I know, you'll pick a few anomalous time estimates and ignore the majority of witnesses who put the time in the range of a few seconds. Just like you ignor that Boger says he saw the plane go into the building, or dismiss any others you don't like as government agents (that is why I don't post their statements).

However, you guys would do well to study normal distributions and understand that there is a reason every witness gives a different path and time estimate and it is the mean of ALL statements that are important, not the individual estimates. You can't throw out one because you think she is a Mossad agent, or another who you think is a the devil, or others that you just don't like what they have to say.

When you do the math and physics, you have at least 60 degree constant banking turns required to jump from Columbia Pike to north of the Citgo and back. I understand you live in an alternate universe where that may be possible, but it is true for this one.

I thought this might help readers understand the path better.

ACPD Dispach Audio

Here are the names of the officers.

Dispatcher - Kyra Pullian

Delta 352 - Corporal Barry Foust, located at the intersection of Walter Reed Drive and Columbia Pike

Motor 11 - Officer Alan Stone

Motor 14 - Officer Richard Cox, located at the intersection of S. Wayne Street and Columbia Pike.

Both CPL Foust and OFF Cox are on Columbia Pike west of the Pentagon area at around 1 - 2 miles. At CPL Foust's location, Columbia Pike and Walter Reed, a civilian witness verifies that the plane flew past that intersection, "an American Airlines plane headed eastbound over the Pike" according to OFF Cox a few blocks away on the Pike from CPL Foust.

This is real-time as it happened audio from the Arlington County Police Department. They verify the path as described by the FDR in this area. So as I said, two banks are required to go from the FDR path (verified by eyewitnesses real-time) and perform a north of Citgo junket.

Originally posted by tezzajw

jthomas, please quote Boger stating that he saw 'Flight AA77' hit the Pentagon. I might have missed it. I recall him stating that he watched a plane hit the Pentagon.

Thanks to 9/11 Files for addressing this.

Now for a timely article in the NYT:

“Vocal Minority Insists It Was All Smoke and Mirrors.”
www.nytimes.com...

"Ted Goertzel, a professor of sociology at Rutgers University who has studied conspiracy theorists, said “there’s a similar kind of logic behind all of these groups, I think.” For the most part, he explained, “They don’t undertake to prove that their view is true” so much as to “find flaws in what the other side is saying.” And so, he said, argument is a matter of accumulation instead of persuasion. “They feel if they’ve got more facts than the other side, that proves they’re right.”

"Mark Fenster, a professor at the University of Florida Levin College of Law who has written extensively on conspiracy theories, said he sees similarities between people who argue that the Moon landings never happened and those who insist that the 9/11 attacks were planned by the government and that President Obama’s birth certificate is fake: at the core, he said, is a polarization so profound that people end up with an unshakable belief that those in power “simply can’t be trusted.”

"The emergence of the Internet as a communications medium, he noted, makes it possible for once-scattered believers to find one another. “It allows the theory to continue to exist, to continue to be available — it’s not just some old dusty books on the half-price shelf.”

"Adam Savage, the co-star of the television show “MythBusters,” spent an episode last year taking apart Moon hoax theories bit by bit, entertainingly and convincingly. The theorists, he noted, never give up. “They’ll say you have to keep an open mind,” he said, “but they reject every single piece of evidence that doesn’t adhere to their thesis.”

Yes, indeed.

Originally posted by turbofan

P.S. Thanks, but no thanks for your code. I already have a copy
through Warren Stutt who is someone more qualified to review FDR data.

[edit on 15-7-2009 by turbofan]

No you don't turbo, because Stutt wrote his in C#, this is in VB.Net. But then again I would not expect you to know the difference.

[edit on 15-7-2009 by 911files]

Originally posted by 911files

Originally posted by Ligon
You're saying that was the only thing stopping you? You didn't have anything more important to do during all of the countless hours (probably hundreds) you spent online in the past couple years trying (and failing) to counter their evidence. [edit on 12-7-2009 by Ligon]

Please Ligon, I have no interest in countering anyone's evidence. I have spent countless hours as you call it evaluating any evidence related to the Pentagon attack, CIT evidence inclusive. There is nothing wrong with the evidence presented by CIT, only the evaluation and 'spin' they choose to put on it (cherry picking).

And yes, spending time with my kids is more important than traveling to Arlington to hear a couple of crack-pots spin tales. I'll wait for the video release.

Quite frankly if you're willing to spend all kinds of man hours debating someone over the internet, then don't attend their public meeting, then come back on the internet and spend MORE man hours on the the subject...

Well that says more than I can sum up in one post.

Glad to see your true colors show in front of the world.

Originally posted by jprophet420
Quite frankly if you're willing to spend all kinds of man hours debating someone over the internet, then don't attend their public meeting, then come back on the internet and spend MORE man hours on the the subject...

Well that says more than I can sum up in one post.

Glad to see your true colors show in front of the world.

Well to be honest, and as I said previously, the only reason I am on here the past few days is because I just got in a new batch of ATC and TMU records from the FAA. It is taking a lot of time to extract the archives (done), convert them to mono-channel mp3's (in process now) and then get them indexed for the internet.

I don't get serious debate from C4T and/or P4T folks in these forums so I don't take it seriously at all. So once again, I am here for a day or so just seeing if they have found an actual witness who says the plane flew over the Pentagon. Looks like the same old song-and-dance, but what the heck, I'm bored.

And no, I will not waste my time and money running somewhere to give them credibility by debating them. There are mountains of evidence documenting that AAL77 hit the Pentagon from government and non-government sources. I have a fraction of that on the web at AAL77.COM. Now, if they ever come up with something that is credible and viable, I might be interested in debating them. Unfortunately, it has been three years now and nothing yet.

you are spending many hours defaming someone, and you wonder why you cant find a serious debate?

reply to post by jthomas


jthomas, the NWO has fooled you again. Open your eyes and stop being a sheeple!!!


From your link:

"Ted Goertzel, a professor of sociology at Rutgers University who has studied conspiracy theorists, said “there’s a similar kind of logic behind all of these groups, I think.”

John Farmer (the commission Farmer, not the self proclaimed "better looking John Farmer") is now the Dean of Rutgers University and he ordered this alleged 'professor of psychology' to contribute to the New York Times article to discredit the truth movement.

Originally posted by 911files

Simple math turbo. Two required turns. One to port to deviate from the last recorded flight path and another to the starboard to clear north of the Citgo and back to the Pentagon and impact as you guys describe.

As you know John it's not what "us guys" describe, it's what the eyewitnesses who were there describe.



As you also know John the FDR data has been proven to be completely fraudulent, and the plane did not fly on the "recorded" (fabricated) flight path even before the the Sheraton and Annex.

It flew south of the fraudulent FDR flight path near the Army Navy Country Club as established in Flight 77: The White Plane and further corroborated by the information in in this thread

Google Video Link

It flew east of the Potomac as established in "How They Pulled It Off" contrary to the fraudulent FDR flight path.

Google Video Link

Do the math for the last recorded speed trends and time to target.

As you know John the FDR data has been proven to be completely fraudulent, and therefore the "last recorded speed trends and time to target" fabricated by the government are bogus and meaningless.

As you know Pilots for 9/11 Truth has done the math and proven that the data reported by the government is not compatible with the government's 757 impact story anyway.

Google Video Link

Again, you know all of this, so it's clear that this is just another chapter in your endless stream of dishonest obfuscation attempts.