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.
At last, The "Watergate" Of 9/11 :
page: 6share:
And this again hardens my opinion, that the false FDR data came from a real plane, departing from Gate D18 or D20 on 9/11, while the real Flight 77
really departed from its usual Gate D26 at 08:10:46 a.m. that morning.
And that real Flight 77 then impacted the Pentagon, as witnessed by a whole crowd of people who all gave their testimonies of seeing a passenger plane impacting the first floor slab of the west wall of the Pentagon.
That means, that the whole Pentagon attack was a military/political false flag operation planned by mass-murderers, which was meticulously planned at forehand, and the plane that departed from D18 or D20, was pre-destined to offer its FDR's bulk data for the false FDR handed over years later.
Probably they only erased for example the last 10 minutes, and re-wrote the last 10 minutes FDR data from Flight 77 into the so formed gap in the false FDR data, changing also all the panick inputs from the pilots who realized that their plane was taken over by remote soft- and hardware. We have found quite some articles which offered witnesses who saw that the real FDR and CVR from the wrecked parts of the plane in the Pentagon were found near the impacted wall, inside the Pentagon.
Then the handlers of 9/11 got it in their hands, and switched data on that tape or solid state memory from that real FDR, making it now a falsified FDR, ready for FOIA release.
Again, why all that trouble? What was on those last 10 minutes of the real FDR in first instance, before it got erased by the 9/11 handlers?
Did the crew thought until the last 10 minutes that they were acting in a nation wide drill, as there were 7 such drills running on 9/11?
Don't you find that a tad bit too much coincidence, so many drills exactly on 9/11?
It's obvious, those drills were part of the planning, to let the pilots involved think nearly to the end, that they were actors in a nation wide national security drill.
And when the secretly build-in remote hardware, took over from the CIA handled "hijackers" pilots, of course they will have shouted and pulled and pushed all kind of cockpit instruments during those last 10 minutes.
And that was to be erased from the original Flight 77 its CVR (Cockpit Voice Recorder) and FDR (Flight Data Recorder).
I am quite sure now, that all planes on 9/11 were told that they acted inside a nationwide drill, and were all taken over by secretly build-in software + hardware in the last minutes.
And all the so-called "hijackers" were patsies, working already for years for the CIA or any one of the other alphabet soup agencies in the USA, GB, France or Israel.
And were killed in the planes, they too were thinking were playing in a drill.
The whole operation must have been a multinational plot, orchestrated on a huge scale by the global puppetmasters who are the real power holders in those mentioned countries and probably a few countries more.
And I hope you, my readers, do now at last understand why I distrust Balsamo and think he's an agent-provocateur, or taken over by a "handler", who is in most such cases a real good IT admin ( but in fact working for f.ex. a US or other country's agency) who offers his help online to a non IT-saffy 9/11 website owner.
The best sign is that he directly banned me, after I posted the Boeing Fast Alignment Procedure screenshot, inside those three screenshots from the INS/IRS pages from the Boeing 757-200 flight manual.
For me, this is a sure sign that he is a planted distractor.
Because he knew what my next posts would be, he knew that Jan Zelman already posted that little red oval in his Gate D20 taxi path picture, and he and/or his handlers realized they had to ban me, or their distractions would be exposed.
And I was also coming far too near in nailing him with his distraction from the NoC witnesses, unrealistic fly-over theory in my only thread at his forums :
Title : ""The Pentagon Attack Arguments List : Fly-over, Or Head-on Impact?, Just two options left : NoC fly-over, or NoC 90° impact.""
www.pilotsfor911truth.org...
pilotsfor911truth.org...
And I am not ready with that, by far not, now I am even far more motivated to expose his fly-over theory as the fraud it is, all over the whole Internet.
Balsamo first nested on the Internet with his P49/11T forums in August 2006 but communicated with CIT already earlier, I suppose, to neutralize Craig Ranke and Aldo Marquis and friends.
And especially their immense important evidence for a North of CITGO gas station flying Flight 77 just seconds before impact.
By winning their trust with his pilot techno babble, and then convincing them with the same techno babble, that Flight 77 had not and could not impacted the Pentagon, but flew over it, because he "proved" to them, that that plane, at that speed (coming from a false FDR ! All those last minutes pre-impact data are false! ) could not have impacted at the first floor slab.
There was a very real impact however, seen by a whole crowd of witnesses at first hand, most no more than 100 meters away from the impact, many much closer. Some much further, but they all saw a jetliner fly INTO the Pentagon.
And those two non-aviation schooled 9/11 "hobbyists" fell hook, line and sinker for his aviation circles "authority".
And thus immediately started the downfall of their own glorious NoC-thesis.
What an immense sad development !
Because in the eyes of an overload of 9/11 interested people, that fly-over theory is so ridiculous, they all automatically distrust their, CIT, Citizen Investigation Team world-first TRUE findings, namely those 13 North of CITGO eyewitnesses, who all however say they saw a NoC flying plane, and saw or expected it impacting seconds thereafter at the west wall of the Pentagon. Because they saw it impact, or saw the billowing smoke after the impact sound.
And no one saw a plane continuing flying over the roofs of the Pentagon.
And I would like to continue my debate here at ATS, with all the misleaded members from the P49/11T forums, who are so brainwashed by their idol Balsamo, that they can't accept all the massive evidence I already laid in front of them in my first and last thread on their forum, that so brutally was cut off by Balsamo.
I found an additional 6 more, for many years now, former SoC accepted, but clearly NoC eyewitness accounts for them, to add to their 13 already found NoC witnesses.
And what does Aldo do to thank me for that?
He gets very nervous, because those six new NoC witnesses ALL saw from very close by, that plane that strafed over their heads or cars, did IMPACT, but they were also positioned in front of the Helipad, which they all say was the left side boundary of the impacting plane's left wing path......Which means that the officially pushed South sided flight path of Flight 77 is blatantly falsified.
First he begged Balsamo for help in my "impact or Fly-over" thread (moved by Balsamo to their Debate forum), and when that help came down to ridiculing me in my "Impact or Fly-over" thread there by Balsamo, based on Balsamo's far too simple high-school based fixed speed and fixed arc fly-over "thesis", and then declaring that I did not give him a same arc back, to back-up my impact thesis, Aldo had the guts to paint me as a thrill seeker, while they know very well from the beginning of their posting here at ATS, who I was and what I stand for.
Btw, go and look up in my "Impact or Fly-over" thread at P49/11T Debate Forum, my FIRST picture of an arc flown by the real attack and impacting plane, leading over the heads of ALL the CIT witnesses, where any intelligent person could see the center point of my arc in that picture, placed in the white far right bottom corner. I wrote under it where to find it and how to use it with your pair of compasses.
(My second one, with the full drawn arc in it, is at the end of my OP of this thread here at ATS now, which is basically the same, I only drew those thin blue lines, that any basic school student could have imagined immediately in my "blank" arc picture at P49/11T, at first sight).
But Balsamo, obnoxious as always, dared to keep repeating that I had not give them yet, a viable arc, while it was in front of their probably half blinded eyes, all that time, posted already by me on his own forum page in my thread. And I told him that his simple calculation did not express the described by all witnesses, reffing up of the jet engines to full power somewhere just before it crossed Route 27 in front of the Pentagon west wall. And the change in direction described by the ANC witnesses and Sean Boger the Helipad controller. And the slight right bank and the slight left bank described by many Route 27 witnesses.
So you have to use much more complicated calculations, which I was writing down and trying to get shown in their forum software for them during three weeks, when suddenly while I was online, my whole 89 MB Wordpad window emptied under my eyes. And my backup didn't work anymore. I know from other forums I was involved with behind the scenes, that the admins can intrude the boxes from members they distrust or see as trouble makers, since every member opens up a connection to the forum software, and with the right hacker skills, they can get into their box, while they stay invisible to the eyes of the owner of that box.
I can't prove it, but I was left over with a very sour taste in my mind.
So I took off a few days, and then decided to give them the link to the lectures from that US aviation professor, where anybody can construct their own calculations involving a plane that makes so many different moves, before it impacts.
Balsamo just simply declared that it must have flown at constant speed in a constant arc, which is simply said, ridiculously simplified aviation techno babble.
Why? Because that seems the only math he is able to master, while in fact you need a much higher level of math to describe the more complicated flight path that Flight 77 flew up till impact. It flew over the Y-shaped antenna on the center of the Navy Annex its 8th building roof, in a slight downward arc towards the space between the ANC buildings and the CITGO gas station, in-between it changed that arc slightly to the right, reffed up its jet engines just before it crossed over the light poles beside Route 27 without touching them, and continued in a very slight left wing down arc to the impact point on the first floor concrete slab of the west wall, making an imprint where the round cabin fuselage fitted perfectly in, and left two huge destructive openings where its engines hit all the just newly reinforced concrete, panzer-windows and the steel beams and Kevlar netting embedded in that concrete and brick wall.
And that real Flight 77 then impacted the Pentagon, as witnessed by a whole crowd of people who all gave their testimonies of seeing a passenger plane impacting the first floor slab of the west wall of the Pentagon.
That means, that the whole Pentagon attack was a military/political false flag operation planned by mass-murderers, which was meticulously planned at forehand, and the plane that departed from D18 or D20, was pre-destined to offer its FDR's bulk data for the false FDR handed over years later.
Probably they only erased for example the last 10 minutes, and re-wrote the last 10 minutes FDR data from Flight 77 into the so formed gap in the false FDR data, changing also all the panick inputs from the pilots who realized that their plane was taken over by remote soft- and hardware. We have found quite some articles which offered witnesses who saw that the real FDR and CVR from the wrecked parts of the plane in the Pentagon were found near the impacted wall, inside the Pentagon.
Then the handlers of 9/11 got it in their hands, and switched data on that tape or solid state memory from that real FDR, making it now a falsified FDR, ready for FOIA release.
Again, why all that trouble? What was on those last 10 minutes of the real FDR in first instance, before it got erased by the 9/11 handlers?
Did the crew thought until the last 10 minutes that they were acting in a nation wide drill, as there were 7 such drills running on 9/11?
Don't you find that a tad bit too much coincidence, so many drills exactly on 9/11?
It's obvious, those drills were part of the planning, to let the pilots involved think nearly to the end, that they were actors in a nation wide national security drill.
And when the secretly build-in remote hardware, took over from the CIA handled "hijackers" pilots, of course they will have shouted and pulled and pushed all kind of cockpit instruments during those last 10 minutes.
And that was to be erased from the original Flight 77 its CVR (Cockpit Voice Recorder) and FDR (Flight Data Recorder).
I am quite sure now, that all planes on 9/11 were told that they acted inside a nationwide drill, and were all taken over by secretly build-in software + hardware in the last minutes.
And all the so-called "hijackers" were patsies, working already for years for the CIA or any one of the other alphabet soup agencies in the USA, GB, France or Israel.
And were killed in the planes, they too were thinking were playing in a drill.
The whole operation must have been a multinational plot, orchestrated on a huge scale by the global puppetmasters who are the real power holders in those mentioned countries and probably a few countries more.
And I hope you, my readers, do now at last understand why I distrust Balsamo and think he's an agent-provocateur, or taken over by a "handler", who is in most such cases a real good IT admin ( but in fact working for f.ex. a US or other country's agency) who offers his help online to a non IT-saffy 9/11 website owner.
The best sign is that he directly banned me, after I posted the Boeing Fast Alignment Procedure screenshot, inside those three screenshots from the INS/IRS pages from the Boeing 757-200 flight manual.
For me, this is a sure sign that he is a planted distractor.
Because he knew what my next posts would be, he knew that Jan Zelman already posted that little red oval in his Gate D20 taxi path picture, and he and/or his handlers realized they had to ban me, or their distractions would be exposed.
And I was also coming far too near in nailing him with his distraction from the NoC witnesses, unrealistic fly-over theory in my only thread at his forums :
Title : ""The Pentagon Attack Arguments List : Fly-over, Or Head-on Impact?, Just two options left : NoC fly-over, or NoC 90° impact.""
www.pilotsfor911truth.org...
pilotsfor911truth.org...
And I am not ready with that, by far not, now I am even far more motivated to expose his fly-over theory as the fraud it is, all over the whole Internet.
Balsamo first nested on the Internet with his P49/11T forums in August 2006 but communicated with CIT already earlier, I suppose, to neutralize Craig Ranke and Aldo Marquis and friends.
And especially their immense important evidence for a North of CITGO gas station flying Flight 77 just seconds before impact.
By winning their trust with his pilot techno babble, and then convincing them with the same techno babble, that Flight 77 had not and could not impacted the Pentagon, but flew over it, because he "proved" to them, that that plane, at that speed (coming from a false FDR ! All those last minutes pre-impact data are false! ) could not have impacted at the first floor slab.
There was a very real impact however, seen by a whole crowd of witnesses at first hand, most no more than 100 meters away from the impact, many much closer. Some much further, but they all saw a jetliner fly INTO the Pentagon.
And those two non-aviation schooled 9/11 "hobbyists" fell hook, line and sinker for his aviation circles "authority".
And thus immediately started the downfall of their own glorious NoC-thesis.
What an immense sad development !
Because in the eyes of an overload of 9/11 interested people, that fly-over theory is so ridiculous, they all automatically distrust their, CIT, Citizen Investigation Team world-first TRUE findings, namely those 13 North of CITGO eyewitnesses, who all however say they saw a NoC flying plane, and saw or expected it impacting seconds thereafter at the west wall of the Pentagon. Because they saw it impact, or saw the billowing smoke after the impact sound.
And no one saw a plane continuing flying over the roofs of the Pentagon.
And I would like to continue my debate here at ATS, with all the misleaded members from the P49/11T forums, who are so brainwashed by their idol Balsamo, that they can't accept all the massive evidence I already laid in front of them in my first and last thread on their forum, that so brutally was cut off by Balsamo.
I found an additional 6 more, for many years now, former SoC accepted, but clearly NoC eyewitness accounts for them, to add to their 13 already found NoC witnesses.
And what does Aldo do to thank me for that?
He gets very nervous, because those six new NoC witnesses ALL saw from very close by, that plane that strafed over their heads or cars, did IMPACT, but they were also positioned in front of the Helipad, which they all say was the left side boundary of the impacting plane's left wing path......Which means that the officially pushed South sided flight path of Flight 77 is blatantly falsified.
First he begged Balsamo for help in my "impact or Fly-over" thread (moved by Balsamo to their Debate forum), and when that help came down to ridiculing me in my "Impact or Fly-over" thread there by Balsamo, based on Balsamo's far too simple high-school based fixed speed and fixed arc fly-over "thesis", and then declaring that I did not give him a same arc back, to back-up my impact thesis, Aldo had the guts to paint me as a thrill seeker, while they know very well from the beginning of their posting here at ATS, who I was and what I stand for.
Btw, go and look up in my "Impact or Fly-over" thread at P49/11T Debate Forum, my FIRST picture of an arc flown by the real attack and impacting plane, leading over the heads of ALL the CIT witnesses, where any intelligent person could see the center point of my arc in that picture, placed in the white far right bottom corner. I wrote under it where to find it and how to use it with your pair of compasses.
(My second one, with the full drawn arc in it, is at the end of my OP of this thread here at ATS now, which is basically the same, I only drew those thin blue lines, that any basic school student could have imagined immediately in my "blank" arc picture at P49/11T, at first sight).
But Balsamo, obnoxious as always, dared to keep repeating that I had not give them yet, a viable arc, while it was in front of their probably half blinded eyes, all that time, posted already by me on his own forum page in my thread. And I told him that his simple calculation did not express the described by all witnesses, reffing up of the jet engines to full power somewhere just before it crossed Route 27 in front of the Pentagon west wall. And the change in direction described by the ANC witnesses and Sean Boger the Helipad controller. And the slight right bank and the slight left bank described by many Route 27 witnesses.
So you have to use much more complicated calculations, which I was writing down and trying to get shown in their forum software for them during three weeks, when suddenly while I was online, my whole 89 MB Wordpad window emptied under my eyes. And my backup didn't work anymore. I know from other forums I was involved with behind the scenes, that the admins can intrude the boxes from members they distrust or see as trouble makers, since every member opens up a connection to the forum software, and with the right hacker skills, they can get into their box, while they stay invisible to the eyes of the owner of that box.
I can't prove it, but I was left over with a very sour taste in my mind.
So I took off a few days, and then decided to give them the link to the lectures from that US aviation professor, where anybody can construct their own calculations involving a plane that makes so many different moves, before it impacts.
Balsamo just simply declared that it must have flown at constant speed in a constant arc, which is simply said, ridiculously simplified aviation techno babble.
Why? Because that seems the only math he is able to master, while in fact you need a much higher level of math to describe the more complicated flight path that Flight 77 flew up till impact. It flew over the Y-shaped antenna on the center of the Navy Annex its 8th building roof, in a slight downward arc towards the space between the ANC buildings and the CITGO gas station, in-between it changed that arc slightly to the right, reffed up its jet engines just before it crossed over the light poles beside Route 27 without touching them, and continued in a very slight left wing down arc to the impact point on the first floor concrete slab of the west wall, making an imprint where the round cabin fuselage fitted perfectly in, and left two huge destructive openings where its engines hit all the just newly reinforced concrete, panzer-windows and the steel beams and Kevlar netting embedded in that concrete and brick wall.
Balsamo uses techno babble in his front page article when he don't know how to explain his own erratic method to his intelligent readers.
And hopes that they bow for authority and don't ask him how he arrived at his erratic northern departure gate conclusion where he holds on so illogically.
If they do, they get banned, problem solved. The best reaction is to smile about it, but this subject is far too important to let him off the hook, this time :
And then he banned me, after I gave him a link to the Google Earth FAQ's, where you can read yourself why he made that error. But that last post nr which I managed to squeeze in in my last moments there, he, or his administrator deleted, when he moved my next posts to the Debate forum.
You could see during one day he (or they) did delete my post nailing him down, because the post numbers did not count up, one number was missing, but then he or his admin saw his/their mistake, and they fixed the post numbers again.
My deleted post nailed him, by showing him in that post that Google's technicians explain to obnoxious people like him, that if you change the eye alt in one of two overlapping Google Earth maps from Google, you distort the outcome.
Banning without giving your opponent any time to defend his position, what a cowardly method to debate a, for you as a forum owner, too touchy subject.
He's repeating the same overlay error in his so called newly corrected picture added to his main page article. But he tries to hide it by excluding the cut-off right part of the new picture where you could have read the different eye altitude of the overlay. Now you see only the eye altitude printed in there, from the underlaying picture. Not the different eye alt from the overlay picture.
And he still refuses to use my sure 100 % reliable method to show to these readers here, how you have to shift back the original 3000+ feet shifted lat/long datapoints
By the way, Balsamo does edit his posts, without non-members being able to see if he does. Since I can not and will not ever go back to that snake-pit, I can't check anymore if a member can see an edit message in the following post by him.
(Here at ATS dishonesty is impossible, you always get an Edit-tag in your posts, when you do edit them.)
This is also the reason why I had to leave this thread unattended for a few days, since I had to safe to disk all the relevant information he also will go change, without anybody being able to see and prove if he did so, afterwards.
This is probably the reason why ATS member "potential_problem" in page 5 advised me to save my work in Adobe Reader PDF format, to preserve all images I used via direct links to Balsamo's site, in PDF, so he can't delete, alter or move his erratic pictures anymore, and is thus forced to debate in honest fashion.
PM me how to do that if anybody would be so kind, and which free program to use for it.
I understand the added benefit of saving pictures in such a PDF file.
I can send the forum fitted formatting in .RTF format with the pictures in them (I always do that in Wordpad) to someone I know is not a minion of Balsamo, and they could do that, if willing to preserve this important 9/11 subject.
I also still have the format of my Seismic evidence laying around, the site where I posted that and linked to, from all my seismic posts here at ATS, is down for more than a year now.
A PDF from all that even more important seismic evidence, that 9/11 surely was a staged false flag operation by at least the US government/military, but probably by a lot more governments aiding the operation, would be wonderful.
And hopes that they bow for authority and don't ask him how he arrived at his erratic northern departure gate conclusion where he holds on so illogically.
If they do, they get banned, problem solved. The best reaction is to smile about it, but this subject is far too important to let him off the hook, this time :
As you can see there is an offset from the runway during departure. This is due to navigational errors associated with the device involved, called an Inertial Navigation System or INS.
CLICK IMAGES TO ENLARGE - CLICK BACK TO RETURN
Color Coding is recognized as:
Green P9-P0 is night before engine off
Red M1 is at the Terminal
Yellow M2 is backed out and start of Taxi
Red M3 is Radio Alt 3 Feet, 1st indication of lift off
(Update to color coding - It appears the Red M1 is the engine start after pushback, and the yellow M2 is forward movement into a turn for start of taxi. Click here for more details.)
After adjusting a Lat/Long offset based on drift prone to the navigational equipment utilized, the positional data has the aircraft departing a gate further east of Gate D26 and on the north side of the Concourse.
And then he banned me, after I gave him a link to the Google Earth FAQ's, where you can read yourself why he made that error. But that last post nr which I managed to squeeze in in my last moments there, he, or his administrator deleted, when he moved my next posts to the Debate forum.
You could see during one day he (or they) did delete my post nailing him down, because the post numbers did not count up, one number was missing, but then he or his admin saw his/their mistake, and they fixed the post numbers again.
My deleted post nailed him, by showing him in that post that Google's technicians explain to obnoxious people like him, that if you change the eye alt in one of two overlapping Google Earth maps from Google, you distort the outcome.
Banning without giving your opponent any time to defend his position, what a cowardly method to debate a, for you as a forum owner, too touchy subject.
He's repeating the same overlay error in his so called newly corrected picture added to his main page article. But he tries to hide it by excluding the cut-off right part of the new picture where you could have read the different eye altitude of the overlay. Now you see only the eye altitude printed in there, from the underlaying picture. Not the different eye alt from the overlay picture.
And he still refuses to use my sure 100 % reliable method to show to these readers here, how you have to shift back the original 3000+ feet shifted lat/long datapoints
By the way, Balsamo does edit his posts, without non-members being able to see if he does. Since I can not and will not ever go back to that snake-pit, I can't check anymore if a member can see an edit message in the following post by him.
(Here at ATS dishonesty is impossible, you always get an Edit-tag in your posts, when you do edit them.)
This is also the reason why I had to leave this thread unattended for a few days, since I had to safe to disk all the relevant information he also will go change, without anybody being able to see and prove if he did so, afterwards.
This is probably the reason why ATS member "potential_problem" in page 5 advised me to save my work in Adobe Reader PDF format, to preserve all images I used via direct links to Balsamo's site, in PDF, so he can't delete, alter or move his erratic pictures anymore, and is thus forced to debate in honest fashion.
PM me how to do that if anybody would be so kind, and which free program to use for it.
I understand the added benefit of saving pictures in such a PDF file.
I can send the forum fitted formatting in .RTF format with the pictures in them (I always do that in Wordpad) to someone I know is not a minion of Balsamo, and they could do that, if willing to preserve this important 9/11 subject.
I also still have the format of my Seismic evidence laying around, the site where I posted that and linked to, from all my seismic posts here at ATS, is down for more than a year now.
A PDF from all that even more important seismic evidence, that 9/11 surely was a staged false flag operation by at least the US government/military, but probably by a lot more governments aiding the operation, would be wonderful.
This is the Balsamo post #59 in the 9/11gate thread :
I'm glad you took exactly that post. It was the reason you had to ban me. Since I showed your members there was more to choose from by the pilots then only your AA rules.
And it's perfectly clear from all the flights depicted in that false FDR, that all pilots from that plane chose every morning to use that Fast Alignment Procedure which cost them no more than 30 seconds instead of more than 17 minutes.
Now I strongly advise my readers, to read the few posts by me and answers by Balsamo above(before) that triumphantly linked-to post of him, to show why HE was wrong, namely my post just before his one, where I showed him the Boeing Advice to pilots of all their 757-200 planes about the 30 seconds Fast Alignment procedure.....
I have shown you already screenshots of the three pages of that Boeing advice in one of the above posts.
If you check the same post now, he edited that last sentence, and you can't see he did so.
So Balsamo can edit at will, ANY post in his forum, without informing all his readers that he did so.
Btw, all other posters seem to can do that only within a short timespan, he can do it always.
The last line is now this one :
Well, the clever reader now knows who indeed was wrong himself.
A sneakier admin than Balsamo I have not met in all my years at the Internet (from the very beginning of it). I was not refusing to provide evidence for my claims, it was all the time already in front of him.
My viable arc picture with all the CIT witnesses exactly under it. The only problem seems to be that Balsamo who claims to be a years long pilot, shows that he has no clue about navigational aids like a pair of compasses, which you put in the center point provided by me in my arc picture, and then extend the other point to one of the arc points above the CIT witness heads, then draw my arc.
I provided that blanked out arc picture with the center point of the arc at the far right bottom, so those geniuses there making fun of me, could print it out and use the above described technique.
He also "forgets" to tell the reader, that he suspended me before I could show him my evidence and nail him down. Which I am doing and will keep doing now.
Here at the far bottom in page 2 of the original thread by tumetuestumefaisdubien/Jan Zelman, Balsamo keeps pushing Jan Zelman to reconsider again his now corrected error from his own opening post, resulting in Jan's now right conclusion that the plane departed from a southern gate and not from a northern gate (posts #39 and #40) :
9/11gate, "AA77" FDR numerology, page 2 at the bottom :
pilotsfor911truth.org...
If you don't mind, since I do not trust Balsamo for one millimeter anymore, I will post a screenshot from those two posts, since Jan Zelman posted a few VERY INTELLIGENT observations in his post #39, and then Balsamo again comes back with his non-proved own erratic conclusion and pushes him to follow the "party line" again :
Well, I posted that plot from Warren Stutt showing the lat/long data during pushback, and if you shift that plot back to its rightful position at the gate (D20 or D18, Jan and I have to decide on that later), Jan is right, it perfectly fits all the taxi lanes, turning points and Runway30.
Which thin line corrected plot by me, drawn in Jan's very precise plotting picture, I posted already in this thread's OP by me.
As I also wrote that already since five months over there at P49/11T.
And now that you know from Jan Zelman about those 38 meters south and 43 meters west INS/IRS shifts during Fast Alignment near the departure Runway 30, it is crystal clear and precise to less than one meter, where that false-FDR its departure flight path first lat/long data point was registered around 8 o'clock in the morning of 9/11 2001.
A few meters after the tow tractor pulled the plane from its resting place at the passenger terminal gate D18 or D20, when the pilot started his engines against normal procedure.
He copied btw the behavior of the pilot of the real Flight 77 departing from Gate D26, as always, who also started his engines while being towed. I have linked to onesliceshort's links at tume's thread over at P49/11T, that give ground personnel FBI interviews.
The somewhat hilarious fact is, that Balsamo/TigerTracks again repeat the initial overlay error in his newly edited picture of his data points overlayed over his Google Earth picture of Dulles Airport in his main page article about the Dulles departure gate problem.
And Balsamo, all your work in this thread on plotting datapoints at earlier flights of that fake-Flight 77 to LA, and fake-Flight 144 back from LA, where you thought that plane taxied through grass and buildings, is moot.
You first have to find ALL the Fast Alignment points in those flight paths, so you can correct all the taxiing patterns again.
I predict you, that suddenly all the taxiing and runway routes are perfectly matching the Dulles Airport maps and other airport maps.
Good luck with all that new not necessary work, based on a clearly falsified FDR....
But, perhaps, you would find some more pointers to an already proved falsification of data.
It looks logical however, that all the false plane's FDR data will turn out to be correct, only not the last say, 10 minutes, when the remote soft-and hardware took over, perhaps steered by handlers in that false plane, following the real Flight 77, but I admit, that's all pure conspiracy talk....but one day....
If you really want to be famous, concentrate yourself on the paper trails left behind from the planes departing every day for two weeks before 9/11 from those two gates D18 or D20 and even better, also from nearby gates.
And the ones arriving during the same two weeks at Gate D15 or nearby.
See if there were any military planes registered during that period at the D-Concourse...
See if any plane with a special task left without passengers in those two weeks...
Go interview former ground handlers and airliner personnel, former or still working at Dulles D-Concourse, ask them if any colleagues left their job shortly after 9/11. If you get results, delve into those sudden job leavers.
One is already mentioned in the FBI interviews, by name.
And, Balsamo, I repeat it again, since one has to shout for weeks in your ears to get through to your obnoxious brain, you are set back with your Pilots forums, to pre false-FDR nonsense times, where we were analyzing real people who really saw an impact. Forget all the false FOIA released "official" data. Its all falsified, partly or totally.
But I know already what you for sure are gonna do.
That's why I still like people like Craig and Aldo, and especially Domenick diMaggio so much, and forgive them for their sometimes irritating forum behavior, since I know how they were harassed at every forum they visited.
Because they did and I really hope still DO, what all you Americans should have done, in uncountable masses.
INTERVIEW ALL THE WITNESSES;
do not trust the media doing that for you!
They only tell or show you what their bosses think you want to hear and see.
But most of the already lethargic Americans preferred to sit on their couch in front of that indoctrination apparatus.
Goodbye America, your days are counted.
All the signs are in place that you have been deserted by the elite already during ten years.
They moved on to the next birthplaces of richness....China, India, Brazil, Kazakhstan and Russia. First oil again, then rare earth metals, then ?.....
They nest for a period of time, then migrate again.
Follow them damn birds, use your hunting skills.
I have been informed that LaBtop is a bit upset (an understatement) that i suspended him for trolling and is now on a rampage at ATS attacking our work and me personally.
So let me clarify for the readers.
At no time have i claimed the data shows the aircraft departing gate D9 or 11 as LaBtop is now deceptively asserting. Tume made that claim in his original post.
(tumetuestumefaisdubien @ Feb 24 2011, 03:37 AM) *
It's not completely clear what a number the gate has - we have there two gates:
9 and 11.
LT insert : Peers keep you working on the top of your personal performance curve. You see peers as your enemies.
And please react on the meat of the matter, not on a detail like which exact northern gate. You know Tume used Gate D9 or D11 in his OP, and you used his whole thread to keep hammering on a northern departure gate.
But to let you sleep an hour more, yes, I admit you did not use an exact northern gate in your front page article.
By the way, tezzajw, I know Balsamo did not claim the northern Gate D9 or D11 , that was Jan Zelman in his opening post here in his thread, where Balsamo "forgot" to give the link to, in his above quote.
But he keeps holding on to a NORTHERN departure gate, which is totally wrong. And he keeps saying that you can't find a precise gate. You can however easily.
This is that thread by Jan Zelman/tume :
9/11gate, "AA77" FDR numerology
It is solely Balsamo in that whole thread, who keeps after the opening post by Jan, hammering on an, in his opinion, surely northern departure gate, even when Jan shows him later that he changed his mind to a southern gate, and also told him that the lat/long data registered by the INS/IRS are much preciser than Farmer, Stutt and Balsamo all thought.
Their error margins are nullified by the way, when you have multiple reference points for that data on the taxi lanes and runways corners. Then they suddenly become very precise data points after you have corrected for drift by shifting the WHOLE complete arrival or departure pattern over the HD map you use of Dulles Airport.
Jan stated that the error margin in his eyes was less than 30 meters, but he forgot that when you have another set of much more precise reference points to compare to, that error margin doesn't count anymore, it becomes a new, much smaller combined error margin of the two data sets.
One lat/long plotting map, and one VERY precise HD Google map of Dulles Airport. The error margin is then in fact nullified, for all of our needs.
If you want to check later, if Balsamo and friends again will silently edit or move or delete whole or partly posts or threads, you, the reader, should also save the now 3 full pages and 1 last page with 2 posts of that thread to your hard disk.
I thought tezzajw, that you of all, would know the drill by now.
Balsamo keeps hammering on him not mentioning the number of the northern gate Jan Zelman at first interpreted, and which I mentioned, since Balsamo copied all Zelman's information to construct his own front page piece, where he holds on so illogically to a northern gate.
Instead of addressing the real meat I addressed, in this case his illogical holding on to some northern departure gate, and his wrongly constructed "proof" for that.
He has for sure seen his own picture with his own plotted 3000+ feet shifted data points in it, where I just introduced him to simple geometry and trigonometry, by simply using perpendicular but identical length lines connecting the corner points in his plotted data line, written by me in his own picture, to show him what exactly he did wrong.
But that he will not ever address, or I or you or any other member here will press him to answer to us, why he does not address my very basic real proof, based in fact on his own published figures, that the departure route, after adjusting by me on his own picture, originated at Gate D18 (or Gate D20 as Jan Zelman thought)
Balsamo managed to scare off two of his members in that thread from their rightful later conclusion that it was not a northern, but a southern departure gate where the false-FDR plane departed from.
In fact also the thread starter, Jan Zelman / tumetuestumefaisdubien. Who tried to correct his initial erratic northern gate conclusion from his opening post.
You, Balsamo, did build your main page article based on his findings, and you did not correct to this date, your wrong conclusion that the plane from this false-FDR, departed from a NORTHERN gate, thus you did not double check Jan's method.
And you give his top-notch research a very bad press.
Jan, at that time, still thought that the arrival and the departure gate were identical, he did not notice yet, at the time of his opening post that the plane was towed overnight around the D-Concourse building, around GATE D26 and towed further eastwards, to GATE D18. And that during that time the engines were off, thus also the INS/IRS system, and that the new lat/long position was only registered when the next morning on 9/11, the engines were started. Because only then the INS/IRS system is also restarted.
By the way, the real Flight 77 always arrived AND departed from the same gate, GATE D26 at the far western end of the D-Concourse. For many years already.
Matter of fact, if you look at the diagram i provided on our original article at our website, the picture clearly shows Gate D19 or 21, not D9 or 11 as LaBtop is deceptively claiming i said...
LT insert : Your picture also clearly shows that the south going part of your overlayed wrong plotting, is not following the right taxi lane, but cuts through the grass. Thus it has to be moved sidewards, to the right in your picture, to be able to follow it's rightful taxi lane. And there was your conclusion of a northern departure gate based on.
On top of that, you used all wrong dimensions in all your overlays, which made them all about 40 yards too big to overlay.
Remember, you and your "peers" made fun of my remark, that you used non-identical pictures to overlay on eachother? Those childish types also posted "funny" pictures to whip up the crowd into an anti-LT frenzy. That kind of behavior which does not get corrected by admin or mod; no, even worse, is actively supported by them, is the reason why your forum is quickly degenerating into a snake pit, just as the 9/11 JREF forum is already for years.
(IMG: pilotsfor911truth.org... )
Furthermore, I never claimed any specific gate for the data as it was too hard to discern an exact gate, we have only claimed in our article that the aircraft did not push from gate D26, which apparently, LaBTop agrees with, but instead, elects to attack us using deception.
LT insert : No, I do not attack the plural "us" you use deceptively, I attack your obnoxious behavior showing you can't even admit a simple error only you in person made, and then you forced that same error upon three of your intelligent members to follow through, and tried the same trick on me, an intelligent "Troll" and made a huge mistake in doing so.
I abhor that kind of behavior, since it is the main reason that our society is going down the drain at increasing speed. It's the same obnoxious behavior shown by politicians, military brass, CEO's from many internationally operating conglomerates, and especially dishonest scientists who sold out to the capitalistic tricks used by those conglomerates to push through their money making "research" orders, no matter what effects they have on humanity, only profit prevails.
As I have explained elsewhere on this forum, given that the terminal is rather narrow and there is a margin for error in IRS coordinates (I believe it's around 50 feet give or take, after being initialized and aligned, IIRC)... it's impossible to determine north or south push, but the more likely push is from the north due to airline procedure as i have explained in this thread and elsewhere and agreed upon by other verified aviation professionals.
A North push is from gate D21 or D19, a south push is from D18 or D16.
What is for certain, is that the data does not and cannot line up with a D26 push, this, once again, makes the govt story false.
LT insert : Well, I have news for you then, and you should have known that already before you posted your "answer" to me, when you would have read my thread here with an open mind.
We can easily determine the EXACT arrival and departure positions at the gates at Dulles, with an error margin not greater than the possible error margin in the provided latitude and longitude numbers, combined with the exactitude from the offered by Google Earth high definition pictures of Dulles Airport.
That's my next question for you. Do you know how to determine that error margin from the given coordinates and Google Earth charts? And then tell us how damn small in fact that margin is?
I'll help you a tiny bit, since you showed already now two times (1. "too hard to discern an exact gate" 2. "it's impossible to determine north or south push" ) that you can't do it yourself if not pressed by "trolling" peers :
Go look up the value the last digit of the latitude and longitude in that FDR is expressed in.
And the exactness of the present day Dulles Airport Google Earth HD maps.
Hope this helps clear up any confusion caused by an obvious disgruntled and deceptive troll named LaBTop, who clearly does not have any experience whatsoever in aviation related topics.
For those interested in reading why LaBTop was suspended and how often he is wrong, you can start here...
pilotsfor9... 11truth.org/forum/index.p...&p=10797143
I'm glad you took exactly that post. It was the reason you had to ban me. Since I showed your members there was more to choose from by the pilots then only your AA rules.
And it's perfectly clear from all the flights depicted in that false FDR, that all pilots from that plane chose every morning to use that Fast Alignment Procedure which cost them no more than 30 seconds instead of more than 17 minutes.
Now I strongly advise my readers, to read the few posts by me and answers by Balsamo above(before) that triumphantly linked-to post of him, to show why HE was wrong, namely my post just before his one, where I showed him the Boeing Advice to pilots of all their 757-200 planes about the 30 seconds Fast Alignment procedure.....
I have shown you already screenshots of the three pages of that Boeing advice in one of the above posts.
If you check the same post now, he edited that last sentence, and you can't see he did so.
So Balsamo can edit at will, ANY post in his forum, without informing all his readers that he did so.
Btw, all other posters seem to can do that only within a short timespan, he can do it always.
The last line is now this one :
For those interested in reading why LaBTop was suspended and how often he is wrong, you can start here...
and it ends here with LaBTop refusing to provide evidence for his claims time and time again.
Well, the clever reader now knows who indeed was wrong himself.
A sneakier admin than Balsamo I have not met in all my years at the Internet (from the very beginning of it). I was not refusing to provide evidence for my claims, it was all the time already in front of him.
My viable arc picture with all the CIT witnesses exactly under it. The only problem seems to be that Balsamo who claims to be a years long pilot, shows that he has no clue about navigational aids like a pair of compasses, which you put in the center point provided by me in my arc picture, and then extend the other point to one of the arc points above the CIT witness heads, then draw my arc.
I provided that blanked out arc picture with the center point of the arc at the far right bottom, so those geniuses there making fun of me, could print it out and use the above described technique.
He also "forgets" to tell the reader, that he suspended me before I could show him my evidence and nail him down. Which I am doing and will keep doing now.
Here at the far bottom in page 2 of the original thread by tumetuestumefaisdubien/Jan Zelman, Balsamo keeps pushing Jan Zelman to reconsider again his now corrected error from his own opening post, resulting in Jan's now right conclusion that the plane departed from a southern gate and not from a northern gate (posts #39 and #40) :
9/11gate, "AA77" FDR numerology, page 2 at the bottom :
pilotsfor911truth.org...
If you don't mind, since I do not trust Balsamo for one millimeter anymore, I will post a screenshot from those two posts, since Jan Zelman posted a few VERY INTELLIGENT observations in his post #39, and then Balsamo again comes back with his non-proved own erratic conclusion and pushes him to follow the "party line" again :
Balsamo, post # 40 :
But even then, you still have the aircraft in the grass on Taxi and thrashing the south wall of Concourse Delta.
Also, (and repeated for perhaps the 5th time), aircraft do not start their engines until after pushback.
How can Warren Stutt claim to have a position at the gate, and lat/long plots during pushback, if the FDR doesnt start to record until engines are started?
Answer, he doesnt.
Well, I posted that plot from Warren Stutt showing the lat/long data during pushback, and if you shift that plot back to its rightful position at the gate (D20 or D18, Jan and I have to decide on that later), Jan is right, it perfectly fits all the taxi lanes, turning points and Runway30.
Which thin line corrected plot by me, drawn in Jan's very precise plotting picture, I posted already in this thread's OP by me.
As I also wrote that already since five months over there at P49/11T.
And now that you know from Jan Zelman about those 38 meters south and 43 meters west INS/IRS shifts during Fast Alignment near the departure Runway 30, it is crystal clear and precise to less than one meter, where that false-FDR its departure flight path first lat/long data point was registered around 8 o'clock in the morning of 9/11 2001.
A few meters after the tow tractor pulled the plane from its resting place at the passenger terminal gate D18 or D20, when the pilot started his engines against normal procedure.
He copied btw the behavior of the pilot of the real Flight 77 departing from Gate D26, as always, who also started his engines while being towed. I have linked to onesliceshort's links at tume's thread over at P49/11T, that give ground personnel FBI interviews.
The somewhat hilarious fact is, that Balsamo/TigerTracks again repeat the initial overlay error in his newly edited picture of his data points overlayed over his Google Earth picture of Dulles Airport in his main page article about the Dulles departure gate problem.
And Balsamo, all your work in this thread on plotting datapoints at earlier flights of that fake-Flight 77 to LA, and fake-Flight 144 back from LA, where you thought that plane taxied through grass and buildings, is moot.
You first have to find ALL the Fast Alignment points in those flight paths, so you can correct all the taxiing patterns again.
I predict you, that suddenly all the taxiing and runway routes are perfectly matching the Dulles Airport maps and other airport maps.
Good luck with all that new not necessary work, based on a clearly falsified FDR....
But, perhaps, you would find some more pointers to an already proved falsification of data.
It looks logical however, that all the false plane's FDR data will turn out to be correct, only not the last say, 10 minutes, when the remote soft-and hardware took over, perhaps steered by handlers in that false plane, following the real Flight 77, but I admit, that's all pure conspiracy talk....but one day....
If you really want to be famous, concentrate yourself on the paper trails left behind from the planes departing every day for two weeks before 9/11 from those two gates D18 or D20 and even better, also from nearby gates.
And the ones arriving during the same two weeks at Gate D15 or nearby.
See if there were any military planes registered during that period at the D-Concourse...
See if any plane with a special task left without passengers in those two weeks...
Go interview former ground handlers and airliner personnel, former or still working at Dulles D-Concourse, ask them if any colleagues left their job shortly after 9/11. If you get results, delve into those sudden job leavers.
One is already mentioned in the FBI interviews, by name.
And, Balsamo, I repeat it again, since one has to shout for weeks in your ears to get through to your obnoxious brain, you are set back with your Pilots forums, to pre false-FDR nonsense times, where we were analyzing real people who really saw an impact. Forget all the false FOIA released "official" data. Its all falsified, partly or totally.
But I know already what you for sure are gonna do.
That's why I still like people like Craig and Aldo, and especially Domenick diMaggio so much, and forgive them for their sometimes irritating forum behavior, since I know how they were harassed at every forum they visited.
Because they did and I really hope still DO, what all you Americans should have done, in uncountable masses.
INTERVIEW ALL THE WITNESSES;
do not trust the media doing that for you!
They only tell or show you what their bosses think you want to hear and see.
But most of the already lethargic Americans preferred to sit on their couch in front of that indoctrination apparatus.
Goodbye America, your days are counted.
All the signs are in place that you have been deserted by the elite already during ten years.
They moved on to the next birthplaces of richness....China, India, Brazil, Kazakhstan and Russia. First oil again, then rare earth metals, then ?.....
They nest for a period of time, then migrate again.
Follow them damn birds, use your hunting skills.
so basically the pilots that disagree with you are dis-info sell outs ?
I have a nagging question, which bothers me more than the whole Balsamo circus.
What caused those three early ERROR subframe lines in that false-FDR decode by UnderTow ?
When one decides to delve into that famous "worlds first" decode, from a now proved false-FDR of Flight AA 77 by UnderTow you can find the engine start latitude and longitude data points near the arrival and departure gates in that decode :
www.pilotsfor911truth.org...
The real AA departure gates lat/long ones, you can find on the Gates lat/long Jeppesen Charts for Dulles Int. Airport, these false-FDR decoded-ones show other gates than D26..
Of course, after the needed corrections for the huge positional shift, everybody will immediately see they are false when plotting the listings data on a Google HD map of Dulles.
To perform these needed corrections, you have to copy the full arrival and the full departure routes of that decoded plane, on two separate plastic sheets, and shift those over at least six known, and clearly logical turning points of that depicted plane onto Dulles runways and taxi lanes, and onto the arrival or departure runways, and when you are done doing that, you can only conclude to one exact arrival gate and one exact departure gate (D15 and D18).
A few feet, or about 30 feet (Balsamo : see below full Post #7: ""I agree it does seem a bit reversed when considering the description, but there could be a small error in matters of feet when getting to such resolution."" ) or
What caused those three early ERROR subframe lines in that false-FDR decode by UnderTow ?
When one decides to delve into that famous "worlds first" decode, from a now proved false-FDR of Flight AA 77 by UnderTow you can find the engine start latitude and longitude data points near the arrival and departure gates in that decode :
www.pilotsfor911truth.org...
The real AA departure gates lat/long ones, you can find on the Gates lat/long Jeppesen Charts for Dulles Int. Airport, these false-FDR decoded-ones show other gates than D26..
Of course, after the needed corrections for the huge positional shift, everybody will immediately see they are false when plotting the listings data on a Google HD map of Dulles.
To perform these needed corrections, you have to copy the full arrival and the full departure routes of that decoded plane, on two separate plastic sheets, and shift those over at least six known, and clearly logical turning points of that depicted plane onto Dulles runways and taxi lanes, and onto the arrival or departure runways, and when you are done doing that, you can only conclude to one exact arrival gate and one exact departure gate (D15 and D18).
A few feet, or about 30 feet (Balsamo : see below full Post #7: ""I agree it does seem a bit reversed when considering the description, but there could be a small error in matters of feet when getting to such resolution."" ) or
Wow, what a convoluted mess, and still LaBTop is unable to provide a quote from Balsamo claiming or showing the aircraft departed Gate D9 or D11, the
whole foundation for LaBTop attacking Pilots For 911 Truth. LaBTop, why are you posting knowing false and misleading statements on this forum?
"Balsamo, the owner of P49/11T, says the fake flight departed at a northern gate, D9 or D11." - LaBTop
"How on earth Balsamo ever could conclude to Gate D9 or D11 as the departure gate for the plane depicted in those false flight data from the FOIA requests, is a complete mystery for me. " - LaBTop
"Balsamo talked him out of it, based on his own wrong conclusion of a northern gate as the false FDR's departure gate, Gate D9 or D11. " - LaBTop
"Then in a few more posts by a clearly irritated Balsamo, he pressed Jan to accept his, Balsamo's, wrongful conclusion of a Gate D9 or D11..." - LaBTop
"Balsamo already pressed another member, aerohead, to reverse his also right conclusion, Gate D18 south, back into the wrong conclusion by Balsamo, Gates D9 or D11...." - LaBTop
"...that's why he [Balsamo] came to a quite wrong departure Gate, north of the Concourse building ( D9 or D11)" - LaBTop
"...my simple request to him [Balsamo] to correct his wrong Flight 77 departure Gate D9 or D11 conclusion in his own main page piece." - LaBTop
and that was only half way down LaBTop's original post. There are many more.
Now LaBTop admits.....
"I know Balsamo did not claim the northern Gate D9 or D11 , that was Jan Zelman in his opening post..." - LaBTop.
Again LaBTop, why do you post knowingly misleading and false statements on this forum? Where is your apology?
"How on earth Balsamo ever could conclude to Gate D9 or D11 as the departure gate for the plane depicted in those false flight data from the FOIA requests, is a complete mystery for me. " - LaBTop
"Balsamo talked him out of it, based on his own wrong conclusion of a northern gate as the false FDR's departure gate, Gate D9 or D11. " - LaBTop
"Then in a few more posts by a clearly irritated Balsamo, he pressed Jan to accept his, Balsamo's, wrongful conclusion of a Gate D9 or D11..." - LaBTop
"Balsamo already pressed another member, aerohead, to reverse his also right conclusion, Gate D18 south, back into the wrong conclusion by Balsamo, Gates D9 or D11...." - LaBTop
"...that's why he [Balsamo] came to a quite wrong departure Gate, north of the Concourse building ( D9 or D11)" - LaBTop
"...my simple request to him [Balsamo] to correct his wrong Flight 77 departure Gate D9 or D11 conclusion in his own main page piece." - LaBTop
and that was only half way down LaBTop's original post. There are many more.
Now LaBTop admits.....
"I know Balsamo did not claim the northern Gate D9 or D11 , that was Jan Zelman in his opening post..." - LaBTop.
Again LaBTop, why do you post knowingly misleading and false statements on this forum? Where is your apology?
edit on 13-8-2011 by TigerTracks
because: (no reason given)
This thread is just more proof why the truth movement will never get traction. Its a fricken mess. Well done guys.
(Deleted my whole reason why i thought this not worth it to frustrated)
(Deleted my whole reason why i thought this not worth it to frustrated)
NORTHERN GATE, and IMPOSSIBLE TO DESCERN which gate, that's the crux of the matter, as you know very well.
Yes, I made a mistake in my gate numbers writing, I mixed Tume and you up. Big deal.
I apologize for not painstakingly re-checking that small fact.
Can we now return to the crux of the matter, why you did not apologize for your northern gate bullying of your members, and apologizing for making such blatantly false overlay pictures.
Which I now showed to you in your board-email, board messages, and here, how to correctly correct.
In your own picture, so you can't start talking about your seemingly re-corrected overlay method again.
There is no better method than the pair of compasses one. It nullifies all possible overlay interpretation errors.
You simply can't make them when you use just one picture.
Can you refute my pair of compasses method on your own Dulles lat/long plots picture?
Did you print your own picture of those UnderTow plots, and used your own pair of compasses to correct the huge 3000+ feet drift?
Every captain has one, always needed to use on navigational charts, so why do you refuse to use yours?
Can you now admit, just as I just did, that you made a mistake, and apologize to your member Tume, AeroHead, Mainer, and all the rest of of them?
And correct your front page article, insert a link to this thread, or whatever other explanation, but admit that the false Flight 77 carrying that false FDR departed from a southern gate, D18 or D20.
Then we, and especially your own pilots can move on perhaps to researching those southern Gates D18 and D20, finding out what planes departed there that morning. And in the weeks before.
Yes, I made a mistake in my gate numbers writing, I mixed Tume and you up. Big deal.
I apologize for not painstakingly re-checking that small fact.
Can we now return to the crux of the matter, why you did not apologize for your northern gate bullying of your members, and apologizing for making such blatantly false overlay pictures.
Which I now showed to you in your board-email, board messages, and here, how to correctly correct.
In your own picture, so you can't start talking about your seemingly re-corrected overlay method again.
There is no better method than the pair of compasses one. It nullifies all possible overlay interpretation errors.
You simply can't make them when you use just one picture.
Can you refute my pair of compasses method on your own Dulles lat/long plots picture?
Did you print your own picture of those UnderTow plots, and used your own pair of compasses to correct the huge 3000+ feet drift?
Every captain has one, always needed to use on navigational charts, so why do you refuse to use yours?
Can you now admit, just as I just did, that you made a mistake, and apologize to your member Tume, AeroHead, Mainer, and all the rest of of them?
And correct your front page article, insert a link to this thread, or whatever other explanation, but admit that the false Flight 77 carrying that false FDR departed from a southern gate, D18 or D20.
Then we, and especially your own pilots can move on perhaps to researching those southern Gates D18 and D20, finding out what planes departed there that morning. And in the weeks before.
Originally posted by LaBTop
Balsamo shows here that he does not understand what "mainer" tries to explain to him, that if a plane is towed from a northern gate, it will move northwards, and not southwards as depicted in his own decoded plotting.
He agrees ""it does seem a bit reversed when considering the description"", and then waves it away with a moot error margin argument.
Again, I can not find a logical explanation for his totally strange behavior against AeroHead, Jan Zelman, and myself, when we all three come to the same right conclusion, Gate D18 (or Gate D20 by Jan) as the real departure gate.
Even Mainer attentions him on his error, but he obnoxiously holds on to his self proclaimed erroneous conclusion of a northern gate.
Why he keeps hammering that it must be a northern gate, I wonder why.
What's his reason to NOT admitting he made a serious error, correct his main page paper, and generously apologize to his members?
If you read through the thread more, instead of hearing only what you want to hear in order to attack Pilots For 911 Truth due to the fact you were suspended, you will see it explained here...
pilotsfor911truth.org...
and here...
pilotsfor911truth.org...
and here....
pilotsfor911truth.org...
The color coding was also corrected on the P4T article during the time the above posts were made. Your obvious omissions are deceptive to the readers.
The FDR doesn't start to record until the engines are running, you can see this in the FDR data itself. The engines weren't started till after pushback. This is why once it was explained to aerohead, he agreed with Balsamo. aerohead wasn't "talked out of" (or into) anything as you deceptively assert. aerohead understands aviation. You do not.
Also, a Full Align is required at American Airlines before every flight as instructed in the American Airlines checklist.
Your claim that pilots would perform a fast align is completely speculative and in fact if an American Airlines pilot disobeyed the checklist, they would not only get "sacked", but the airline would be fined by the FAA, and the Pilot disciplined by the FAA.
With that said, this is further proof the data did not come from an American Airlines aircraft since clearly the data was not put through a full align as required by American Airlines, approved by the FAA, and followed by American Airlines pilots.
edit on 13-8-2011 by TigerTracks because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by LaBTop
NORTHERN GATE, and IMPOSSIBLE TO DESCERN which gate, that's the crux of the matter, as you know very well.
Yes, I made a mistake in my gate numbers writing, I mixed Tume and you up. Big deal.
Seemed to have been a big deal to you since you repeatedly accused Balsamo of making that claim and was your whole foundation for attacking Balsamo and Pilots For 9/11 Truth, Your attacks are unfounded, unnecessary, and wrong. You were obviously blinded by your hatred for P4T due to your suspension, that you couldn't even get your simple facts straight. How can anyone believe anything else you say over bona fide and verified pilots? Why would they?
The first thing which gets one's attention, are the 3 error lines in the first screen page of that UnderTow "full" FDR decode (use your Page Down
key to flip through the long decode listing).
And when you look at the time stamps (GMThr,GMTmin,GMTsec), you notice it appears in this order :
First time-jump at subframe number 146536.000 :
GMT 0,27,13 and then a data jump of 17 seconds to GMT 0,27,29
ACClat,ACClong positions were : -0.024,-0.004
NAVlat,NAVlon positions were : 38.93777,-77.45694
and were after 17 seconds :
ACClat,ACClong positions were : -0.020,0.010
NAVlat,NAVlon positions were : 38.93726,-77.45471
Second time-jump at subframe number 146554.000 :
GMT 0,27,45 and then a data jump of 11 hr, 43 min, 01 seconds to GMT 12,10,46
Third time-jump at subframe number 146581.000 :
GMT 12,11,10 and then a data jump of 15 seconds to GMT 12,11,25
Both small time jumps can not be explained by a fast Alignment Procedure.
That takes at least 30 seconds.
The nearly 12 hours were probably the night-over parking time with engines off.
But what do these two very short time errors mean?
An APU interrupt? Normally the APU is started about 10 minutes before departure.
And when you look at the time stamps (GMThr,GMTmin,GMTsec), you notice it appears in this order :
First time-jump at subframe number 146536.000 :
GMT 0,27,13 and then a data jump of 17 seconds to GMT 0,27,29
ACClat,ACClong positions were : -0.024,-0.004
NAVlat,NAVlon positions were : 38.93777,-77.45694
and were after 17 seconds :
ACClat,ACClong positions were : -0.020,0.010
NAVlat,NAVlon positions were : 38.93726,-77.45471
Second time-jump at subframe number 146554.000 :
GMT 0,27,45 and then a data jump of 11 hr, 43 min, 01 seconds to GMT 12,10,46
Third time-jump at subframe number 146581.000 :
GMT 12,11,10 and then a data jump of 15 seconds to GMT 12,11,25
Both small time jumps can not be explained by a fast Alignment Procedure.
That takes at least 30 seconds.
The nearly 12 hours were probably the night-over parking time with engines off.
But what do these two very short time errors mean?
An APU interrupt? Normally the APU is started about 10 minutes before departure.
reply to post by LaBTop
LaBTop, have you verified the decode done by Warren Stutt? In other words, have you decoded the binary data yourself?
Not even the NTSB has admitted nor acknowledged such a "decode".
Matter of fact, Warren Stutt himself admits -
Source
LaBTop, have you verified the decode done by Warren Stutt? In other words, have you decoded the binary data yourself?
Not even the NTSB has admitted nor acknowledged such a "decode".
Matter of fact, Warren Stutt himself admits -
"Some people have queried my credentials for investigating Flight Data Recorder (FDR commonly called "black box") data and any relevant affiliations I may have.
I do not have any specific credentials to investigate FDRs or aircraft accidents....
I am not affiliated with nor have I ever worked with or for neither the US National Transport Safety Board (NTSB) nor any other aircraft accident investigator.
I am neither a pilot nor an aircraft engineer and have never flown an aircraft. I am not affiliated with nor have I ever worked with or for any airline, any pilots’ organisation, any aircraft engineering organisation or any FDR manufacturer.
My investigation in to the events of September 11th 2001 is unofficial, independent and completely voluntary.
I was born in New Zealand and I have joint New Zealand and Irish citizenship. I lived in New Zealand up until June 2008 and since then have lived in Brisbane, Australia." - Warren Stutt
Source
edit on 13-8-2011 by TigerTracks because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by TigerTracks
Originally posted by LaBTop
NORTHERN GATE, and IMPOSSIBLE TO DESCERN which gate, that's the crux of the matter, as you know very well.
Yes, I made a mistake in my gate numbers writing, I mixed Tume and you up. Big deal.
Seemed to have been a big deal to you since you repeatedly accused Balsamo of making that claim and was your whole foundation for attacking Balsamo and Pilots For 9/11 Truth, Your attacks are unfounded, unnecessary, and wrong. You were obviously blinded by your hatred for P4T due to your suspension, that you couldn't even get your simple facts straight. How can anyone believe anything else you say over bona fide and verified pilots? Why would they?
No, that was definitely and obviously not my "whole foundation" for confronting you.
And I have no problem or hatred for/with your members, but with you.
Everybody can see that my big deal with you was your firm position in your front page article, fully based on Jan Zelman's research, that the false FDR carrying plane was departing in your opinion, for sure from a northern gate, and that is still stated today in that same article, a northern gate. By you, Balsamo.
While you know that Jan wanted to restate his opening post conclusion, and was now leaning to a southern gate, D18, later D20.
AeroHead told you the same. Just as Mainer. A southern gate.
When are you going to try to refute this picture, your OWN picture, with the correct corrections in it by me, leading to the correct southern gate D18 or D20 ?
Original size 800 px x 559 px : files.abovetopsecret.com...
reply to post by LaBTop
Same Eye Altitude, Same Elev.
Source
It has also been further clarified -
Source
It seems that you are attacking others who virtually agree with you. You have attacked them through your misleading and knowingly false statements which obviously were a big deal to you when you first wrote them, as you repeatedly made the same accusations. Now you backpedal, and still attack. You are disgruntled because you were suspended at P4T forum. That's the bottom line.
Also, thank you for asserting I may be Balsamo. Clearly he knows more than you on this topic and everything else related to aviation.
Same Eye Altitude, Same Elev.
Source
It has also been further clarified -
As I have explained elsewhere on this forum, given that the terminal is rather narrow and there is a margin for error in IRS coordinates (I believe it's around 50 feet give or take, after being initialized and aligned, IIRC)... it's impossible to determine north or south push, but the more likely push is from the north due to airline procedure as i have explained in this thread and elsewhere and agreed upon by other verified aviation professionals.
A North push is from gate D21 or D19, a south push is from D18 or D16.
Source
It seems that you are attacking others who virtually agree with you. You have attacked them through your misleading and knowingly false statements which obviously were a big deal to you when you first wrote them, as you repeatedly made the same accusations. Now you backpedal, and still attack. You are disgruntled because you were suspended at P4T forum. That's the bottom line.
Also, thank you for asserting I may be Balsamo. Clearly he knows more than you on this topic and everything else related to aviation.
edit on
13-8-2011 by TigerTracks because: (no reason given)
Here's a short summary:
In the opening post, LaBTop states to all readers:
In this post, I ask LaBTop:
In this post, TigerTracks states:
In this post, LaBTop states to me:
In this post, LaBTop states to TigerTracks (assuming that TigerTracks is Balsamo):
LaBTop, I'm not sure what to make of this thread? You came out firing against Balsamo for claiming a D9 or D11 departure gate and now you have retracted the claim and admitted that you made a mistake???
The way I see it is that you claim D26 was not the gate used for pushback. Balsamo claims that the data conflicts with a D26 pushback gate. Why the angst if you both essentially agree that the data is probably faked?
In the opening post, LaBTop states to all readers:
Originally posted by LaBTop
Balsamo, the owner of P49/11T, says the fake flight departed at a northern gate, D9 or D11.
In this post, I ask LaBTop:
Originally posted by tezzajw
Can you quote where Rob Balsamo stated that the gate was D9 or D11? I've read his clarification on the P4T forum and he refutes your claim that he stated Gate D9 or Gate D11 was the definite departure point.
In this post, TigerTracks states:
Originally posted by TigerTracks
I've read through the work, and it was never stated by anyone other than Jan Zelman (aka tumetuestumefaisdubien) that the push may have been from D9 or D11. This is why Labtop was unable to source Balsamo making such a statement and could only offer a pic from the Pilots For 911 Truth article, which in fact doesn't even line up to the claims made by Labtop of Balsamo.
In this post, LaBTop states to me:
Originally posted by LaBTop
By the way, tezzajw, I know Balsamo did not claim the northern Gate D9 or D11 , that was Jan Zelman in his opening post here in his thread, where Balsamo "forgot" to give the link to, in his above quote.
In this post, LaBTop states to TigerTracks (assuming that TigerTracks is Balsamo):
Originally posted by LaBTop
Yes, I made a mistake in my gate numbers writing, I mixed Tume and you up. Big deal.
I apologize for not painstakingly re-checking that small fact.
LaBTop, I'm not sure what to make of this thread? You came out firing against Balsamo for claiming a D9 or D11 departure gate and now you have retracted the claim and admitted that you made a mistake???
The way I see it is that you claim D26 was not the gate used for pushback. Balsamo claims that the data conflicts with a D26 pushback gate. Why the angst if you both essentially agree that the data is probably faked?
reply to post by tezzajw
Looks like LaBTop has compounded his problem -
Source
Looks like LaBTop has compounded his problem -
He offers this picture to continue his attacks on our analysis.
But, he conveniently omits shifting the red color coded Lat/Long position M1 to the terminal as he did the M2 yellow position.
A close up....
This is why he omitted it...
I wonder if LaBTop ever gets tired of getting caught it his blatant deceptions.... lol
As I said before....
.....given that the terminal is rather narrow and there is a margin for error in IRS coordinates (I believe it's around 50 feet give or take, after being initialized and aligned, IIRC)... it's impossible to determine north or south push, but the more likely push is from the north due to airline procedure as i have explained in this thread and elsewhere and agreed upon by other verified aviation professionals.
A North push is from gate D21 or D19, a south push is from D18 or D16.
LaBTop is throwing a fit because we show a North push. But if LaBTop would be honest, even with himself, he too would see what we have analyzed.
Seems he still has a stick up his ass because i suspended him. Poor guy... lol
Keep up the good work LaBTop... you're doing a great job of discrediting yourself with your obvious deceptive behavior.
Source
edit on 14-8-2011 by TigerTracks because: (no reason given)
reply to post by TigerTracks
Ah, then I have again news for you.
Btw, you, TigerTrack, just said that "i suspended him" :
Since I have a screenshot from that little error of yours, I would advice you to not edit your post again.
Now I can address you by your real name. As I did already.
And others showed already that you also use other screennames to act as "genuine" OTHER posters, asking your own "questions", so you can answer yourself. Childish.
Please mods, let me finish my debate with him here at ATS, or he will weasel himself again out of my debate with him, by disappearing to his own snake-pit where he knows I can't and won't come in.
EDIT : He smarted me out, he posted it as an external source after his edit. And that was before my screenshot. Sneeky.ENDEDIT.
As usual you, TigerTracks/Balsamo, did not read or do not dare to seriously address one of my last posts,
www.abovetopsecret.com...
describing the find of Jan Zelman, with the 30 seconds Fast Alignment Procedure (found by me in the Boeing 757-200 757-300 Manual) performed in the area described by his red oval, drawn in his picture with the green taxiing route, originating clearly from Gate D18.
In there he describes a sudden 38 meters southwards shift from one subframe number to the next one (subframes always are one second apart!) that he said still has to be performed in that picture, and I now attended him on another 43 meters westwards shift that also has to be performed in his picture.
Jan already showed the real 38 meters downwards shifted route, but erratically as the gates numbers, but he must not shift the gates down, he must only shift the taxi route down, since the gates are stationary, but his taxi route is constructed by him in that stationary GE picture !!!
But that line of D-gates depicted as small red circles, is quite nearing to the real taxi route along the south of the D-Concourse.
I am busy trying to draw that for the audience, so they can see what difference that makes.
It immediately nullifies your addition of that red marker M1.
Original Jan Zelman picture 522px × 811px : xmarinx.sweb.cz...
Btw, I saw a lot of messy defining of subframe datapoints in that original picture of yours of the UnderTow plots.
Is that red marker M1 perhaps the last arrival marker? I in fact do not think so, if you add those 38 meters downwards to that red marker M1 used by UnderTow, you end up full clear of the D-Concourse, and lower south than the D18 or D20 gate positions.
Do you mind giving us, being you the expert, the lat/long coordinates of the 4 last subframe numbers at arrival, with their lat/long definitions, and then the same lat/long definitions for the first four subframe numbers at departure?
That way the readers directly can see what difference there is in distance between the plane's position at Gate D15 at the end of the arrival taxiing route, at engines shut-off subframe time, and the plane's position at engines-on time in the morning near Gate D18 or D20.
And since we can measure in Google Earth what the distance in reality is, by simply using its ruler function between a plane now parked at D15 and a plane parked at the opposite side of D15, at the south side of the D-Concourse, they can easily see that even your red M1 marker then falls full south of the D-Concourse.
Since you yourself always said that the first lat/long datapoint can only be registered at engines-on time, after, but sometimes during towing away. During tow, see my post about the FBI interviewing the ground worker at Dulles, he remarked that the real Flight 77 which really departed from its usual Gate D26, also started his engines DURING towing away time.
I just addressed this already, but you act as if you did not noticed it, as usual.
You really already forgot my previous post about your member Mainer?
Where you even admitted that you also found it a bit curious that the plane at a northern position backed up SOUTH, instead of the normal backup northwards, which seemed to show that your NORTHERN departing plane (wrong!) did back down INTO the D-Concourse building.
But you waved it away again, with your usual (wrong) error margin remark.
Which remark is totally wrong, since when one overlays two pictures, a PATTERN picture onto a HD Google picture, the details of the most precise one prevails. Namely, the Google Earth HD picture error margins, not bigger than ONE METER (see their user guide).
My post at this same page 6 :
www.abovetopsecret.com...
No, Balsamo, there is at the most, a tiny error of maximum ONE METER !!!
Tezzajw, are you serious? It is his totally illogical holding tight to a definite NORTHERN departure gate, all these SEVEN months long, that must be addressed as clearly wrong. Not a minor mistake by me, about Jan calling it D9 orD11, not him.
Because I and Jan Zelman, AeroHead and Mainer, attended him over this whole period on his serious error, but he keeps denying his error.
That is suspicious, since it is utterly important that all his pilots and ground personnel forum-members, and the rest of the world, goes finding out what planes departed from Gate D18 or Gate D20 that morning. If we manage to find details of those flights, we will have a great chance to nail the real perpetraitors of 9/11.
That's why I am so upset about his insisting for seven long months to a NORTHERN departure gate.
And do you now notice at last, how he operates? Do I have to say more?
Ah, then I have again news for you.
Btw, you, TigerTrack, just said that "i suspended him" :
Seems he still has a stick up his ass because i suspended him. Poor guy... lol
Since I have a screenshot from that little error of yours, I would advice you to not edit your post again.
Now I can address you by your real name. As I did already.
And others showed already that you also use other screennames to act as "genuine" OTHER posters, asking your own "questions", so you can answer yourself. Childish.
Please mods, let me finish my debate with him here at ATS, or he will weasel himself again out of my debate with him, by disappearing to his own snake-pit where he knows I can't and won't come in.
EDIT : He smarted me out, he posted it as an external source after his edit. And that was before my screenshot. Sneeky.ENDEDIT.
As usual you, TigerTracks/Balsamo, did not read or do not dare to seriously address one of my last posts,
www.abovetopsecret.com...
describing the find of Jan Zelman, with the 30 seconds Fast Alignment Procedure (found by me in the Boeing 757-200 757-300 Manual) performed in the area described by his red oval, drawn in his picture with the green taxiing route, originating clearly from Gate D18.
In there he describes a sudden 38 meters southwards shift from one subframe number to the next one (subframes always are one second apart!) that he said still has to be performed in that picture, and I now attended him on another 43 meters westwards shift that also has to be performed in his picture.
Jan already showed the real 38 meters downwards shifted route, but erratically as the gates numbers, but he must not shift the gates down, he must only shift the taxi route down, since the gates are stationary, but his taxi route is constructed by him in that stationary GE picture !!!
But that line of D-gates depicted as small red circles, is quite nearing to the real taxi route along the south of the D-Concourse.
I am busy trying to draw that for the audience, so they can see what difference that makes.
It immediately nullifies your addition of that red marker M1.
Original Jan Zelman picture 522px × 811px : xmarinx.sweb.cz...
Btw, I saw a lot of messy defining of subframe datapoints in that original picture of yours of the UnderTow plots.
Is that red marker M1 perhaps the last arrival marker? I in fact do not think so, if you add those 38 meters downwards to that red marker M1 used by UnderTow, you end up full clear of the D-Concourse, and lower south than the D18 or D20 gate positions.
Do you mind giving us, being you the expert, the lat/long coordinates of the 4 last subframe numbers at arrival, with their lat/long definitions, and then the same lat/long definitions for the first four subframe numbers at departure?
That way the readers directly can see what difference there is in distance between the plane's position at Gate D15 at the end of the arrival taxiing route, at engines shut-off subframe time, and the plane's position at engines-on time in the morning near Gate D18 or D20.
And since we can measure in Google Earth what the distance in reality is, by simply using its ruler function between a plane now parked at D15 and a plane parked at the opposite side of D15, at the south side of the D-Concourse, they can easily see that even your red M1 marker then falls full south of the D-Concourse.
Since you yourself always said that the first lat/long datapoint can only be registered at engines-on time, after, but sometimes during towing away. During tow, see my post about the FBI interviewing the ground worker at Dulles, he remarked that the real Flight 77 which really departed from its usual Gate D26, also started his engines DURING towing away time.
I just addressed this already, but you act as if you did not noticed it, as usual.
You really already forgot my previous post about your member Mainer?
Where you even admitted that you also found it a bit curious that the plane at a northern position backed up SOUTH, instead of the normal backup northwards, which seemed to show that your NORTHERN departing plane (wrong!) did back down INTO the D-Concourse building.
But you waved it away again, with your usual (wrong) error margin remark.
Which remark is totally wrong, since when one overlays two pictures, a PATTERN picture onto a HD Google picture, the details of the most precise one prevails. Namely, the Google Earth HD picture error margins, not bigger than ONE METER (see their user guide).
My post at this same page 6 :
www.abovetopsecret.com...
Balsamo : I agree it does seem a bit reversed when considering the description, but there could be a small error in matters of feet when getting to such resolution.
No, Balsamo, there is at the most, a tiny error of maximum ONE METER !!!
Tezzajw, are you serious? It is his totally illogical holding tight to a definite NORTHERN departure gate, all these SEVEN months long, that must be addressed as clearly wrong. Not a minor mistake by me, about Jan calling it D9 orD11, not him.
Because I and Jan Zelman, AeroHead and Mainer, attended him over this whole period on his serious error, but he keeps denying his error.
That is suspicious, since it is utterly important that all his pilots and ground personnel forum-members, and the rest of the world, goes finding out what planes departed from Gate D18 or Gate D20 that morning. If we manage to find details of those flights, we will have a great chance to nail the real perpetraitors of 9/11.
That's why I am so upset about his insisting for seven long months to a NORTHERN departure gate.
And do you now notice at last, how he operates? Do I have to say more?
edit on 14/8/11 by LaBTop because: See my EDIT to ENDEDIT remark about the external source.
Originally posted by LaBTop
Tezzajw, are you serious?
This is what I see and probably what a lot of other people see:
You created this thread with a really-really-really long, convoluted post. The start of your opening post and all the way through your opening post, you claimed that Balsamo stated the pushgate was D9 or D11.
Then, you admitted that was a mistake.
Essentially, you and Balsamo both agree that the data is highly suspicious. But, your attempt to discredit Balsamo didn't work as planned, when you had to backpedal and apologise for making the mistake that you did.
I agree with you that complete records about all of the arrivals/departures from the D concourse gates would be extremely benefical. How do you propse to obtain that information?
I was honest, you were not.
I gave the readers two pictures.
Your own not yet shifted 3000+ feet off picture, and also the same picture but with my mathematically correct corrections of your error in it, so everybody can try for themselves if I am honest.
I showed everybody without a shimmer of doubt, that you used Google's overlay technique in an incorrect manner.
Why do you choose to let personal ego prevail over online reputation, which you are seriously damaging by your stubborn clutching to a northern departure gate, thus blocking your members to go investigate the real departure gate planes. Or do you have other reasons?
You say you give us a new, corrected overlay picture with identical eye-alts, but you don't give us the two pictures which you used to overlay on each other. So we can see those eye-alts for ourselves, and see what you obviously must do wrong
You provide one overlay picture of two separate pictures, and to hide both eye-alts, you did cut-off the right portion of one of them. Now we can only read the eye-alt of one of your pictures.
Be so kind to provide us all with the two pictures you used, the 3000+ feet shifted one, and the altered to the "same" eye-alt UnderTow plots one, you used to blow up to the "exact" dimensions of the 3000+ feet one.
So we can construct for ourselves, the above, posted by you, again wrong overlay of one picture over the other second picture.
That's called peer review, giving the whole world the chance to repeat your own research.
You seem to have a lot of trouble with peer review.
You obviously do not like it's existence.
May I guess what your answer will be?
Answer : Sorry, I am not Balsamo, so you must ask himself.
My next question will of course be :
You ask him and we will graciously wait (not too long) for the two separate images he overlayed again in a wrongful manner.
We can wait, since I already offered the indisputable mathematical evidence in Balsamo's own image, that his overlay technique is seriously wrong.
If you use my mathematically correct method of shifting plot-positions to known features of Dulles Airport, anyone can see that the plane departed from Gate D18 or D20.
When I shifted his whole plotting pattern, following basic mathematical rules, to several fixed points in the Dulles Airport image, like the turning point on the start of Runway 30, we all can see that the resulting south-turning point west of the D-Concourse was situated under/south of the D-Concourse, and the taxi route from end of tow was running perpendicular to the south side of that D-Concourse, starting at Gate D18 or D20. (Your squared yellow M2 marker).
And I attended on top of that, all of you already, on Jan Zelman's find of the sudden 38/43 meters north-to-south and east-to-west lat/long shift within one second subframe switch, in the bottom red oval of his thin green line picture depicting the departure taxiing.
And I explained that that must have been a Boeing advised, Fast Alignment procedure. As proved by the recordings in that false FDR of all the former flights in the weeks before, which all took over at every start of the engines, the same huge 3000+ lat/long shift, and thus also performed a quick 30 seconds Fast Alignment, there CAN BE NO OTHER REASON, or those planes could have never departed. They just obviously didn't care to take over at every flight start, that same huge shift in recorded position in the INS/IRS system. They just left it standing in the record of the INS/IRS system. They obviously knew it did not really matter for their lives and that of their passengers.
They flew in all those preceding flights, with the new fast aligns, they did not care about the records, which apparently did not interfere with their actual flying on, with those fast align coordinates.
This shows in fact that AA must have known about this behavior against AA start-up rules, of all their pilots, otherwise heads should have rolled long before. They closed a greedy eye for this behavior, since it was in their favor, they flew in time, one of the most important features they applaud their pilots for.
You should read at last the Google Earth User Guide, Creating an Image Overlay, Manual coordinates for each corner of the image overlay.
I gave the readers two pictures.
Your own not yet shifted 3000+ feet off picture, and also the same picture but with my mathematically correct corrections of your error in it, so everybody can try for themselves if I am honest.
I showed everybody without a shimmer of doubt, that you used Google's overlay technique in an incorrect manner.
Why do you choose to let personal ego prevail over online reputation, which you are seriously damaging by your stubborn clutching to a northern departure gate, thus blocking your members to go investigate the real departure gate planes. Or do you have other reasons?
You say you give us a new, corrected overlay picture with identical eye-alts, but you don't give us the two pictures which you used to overlay on each other. So we can see those eye-alts for ourselves, and see what you obviously must do wrong
You provide one overlay picture of two separate pictures, and to hide both eye-alts, you did cut-off the right portion of one of them. Now we can only read the eye-alt of one of your pictures.
Be so kind to provide us all with the two pictures you used, the 3000+ feet shifted one, and the altered to the "same" eye-alt UnderTow plots one, you used to blow up to the "exact" dimensions of the 3000+ feet one.
So we can construct for ourselves, the above, posted by you, again wrong overlay of one picture over the other second picture.
That's called peer review, giving the whole world the chance to repeat your own research.
You seem to have a lot of trouble with peer review.
You obviously do not like it's existence.
May I guess what your answer will be?
Answer : Sorry, I am not Balsamo, so you must ask himself.
My next question will of course be :
You ask him and we will graciously wait (not too long) for the two separate images he overlayed again in a wrongful manner.
We can wait, since I already offered the indisputable mathematical evidence in Balsamo's own image, that his overlay technique is seriously wrong.
If you use my mathematically correct method of shifting plot-positions to known features of Dulles Airport, anyone can see that the plane departed from Gate D18 or D20.
When I shifted his whole plotting pattern, following basic mathematical rules, to several fixed points in the Dulles Airport image, like the turning point on the start of Runway 30, we all can see that the resulting south-turning point west of the D-Concourse was situated under/south of the D-Concourse, and the taxi route from end of tow was running perpendicular to the south side of that D-Concourse, starting at Gate D18 or D20. (Your squared yellow M2 marker).
And I attended on top of that, all of you already, on Jan Zelman's find of the sudden 38/43 meters north-to-south and east-to-west lat/long shift within one second subframe switch, in the bottom red oval of his thin green line picture depicting the departure taxiing.
And I explained that that must have been a Boeing advised, Fast Alignment procedure. As proved by the recordings in that false FDR of all the former flights in the weeks before, which all took over at every start of the engines, the same huge 3000+ lat/long shift, and thus also performed a quick 30 seconds Fast Alignment, there CAN BE NO OTHER REASON, or those planes could have never departed. They just obviously didn't care to take over at every flight start, that same huge shift in recorded position in the INS/IRS system. They just left it standing in the record of the INS/IRS system. They obviously knew it did not really matter for their lives and that of their passengers.
They flew in all those preceding flights, with the new fast aligns, they did not care about the records, which apparently did not interfere with their actual flying on, with those fast align coordinates.
This shows in fact that AA must have known about this behavior against AA start-up rules, of all their pilots, otherwise heads should have rolled long before. They closed a greedy eye for this behavior, since it was in their favor, they flew in time, one of the most important features they applaud their pilots for.
You should read at last the Google Earth User Guide, Creating an Image Overlay, Manual coordinates for each corner of the image overlay.
new topics
-
Turns out, they planned to go after P-nut.
US Political Madness: 3 hours ago -
Sick sick sick
Social Issues and Civil Unrest: 9 hours ago -
Comcast dumping MSNBC
Mainstream News: 11 hours ago
top topics
-
Comcast dumping MSNBC
Mainstream News: 11 hours ago, 19 flags -
President-elect TRUMP Picks MATT GAETZ for his ATTORNEY GENERAL - High Level PANIC Ensues.
2024 Elections: 15 hours ago, 17 flags -
Turns out, they planned to go after P-nut.
US Political Madness: 3 hours ago, 10 flags -
Sick sick sick
Social Issues and Civil Unrest: 9 hours ago, 7 flags
active topics
-
How can you defend yourself when the police will not tell you what you did?
Posse Comitatus • 77 • : Oldcarpy2 -
Should we look for the truth, or just let it go?
US Political Madness • 104 • : chr0naut -
Turns out, they planned to go after P-nut.
US Political Madness • 14 • : Thoughtful3 -
Breaking: FBI Agents Raid Polymarket CEO After Betting Site Predicts Trump Win
General Conspiracies • 21 • : GlitchMechanic -
President-Elect DONALD TRUMP's 2nd-Term Administration Takes Shape.
Political Ideology • 170 • : Dandandat3 -
Critical shortcomings of the Patriot complex
Weaponry • 96 • : coldisbest118 -
WATCH LIVE: US Congress hearing on UFOs, unidentified anomalous phenomena
Aliens and UFOs • 42 • : putnam6 -
Sick sick sick
Social Issues and Civil Unrest • 42 • : Oldcarpy2 -
Comcast dumping MSNBC
Mainstream News • 17 • : WeMustCare -
The Acronym Game .. Pt.4
General Chit Chat • 948 • : Encia22