Ughhh. Flight 77 flight path

[Crazytimes]

I ran into a loon who is arguing the flight 77 flight path. He is using this video and saying it is irrefutable.

http://www.infowars.com/independent-investigation-into-pentagon-attack-yield
s-alarming-information/

Anyway, where is the best place to point him that discusses the flight path BS ? I have some hope for him although little.

Thanks in advance.

[Crazytimes]

Oh, I also need to find the dicussion about the cab driver because he thinks that is irrefutable also.

[carlitos]

I typed "flight path pentagon taxi" in the search bar and found a whole bunch of stuff.

ETA - deleted the links, as I didn't have time to read / recommend. Good luck.

[R.Mackey]

Efficiently, the best evidence against that stupid proposed alternate flight path is that the real flight path was observed on RADAR. Here (http://62.204.241.30/public/) is the moved archive of John Farmer's data, hosted by user Klimax, including RADAR, tower communications, and so on ad infinitum.

Also, this (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=3966936#post3966936) is what those morons actually believe.

I strongly advise you not to waste much time on such people. They are not rational.

[Crazytimes]

Thanks Ryan. I am hopefull that he will change his mind. Any info about Lloyd England ? I found this thread http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=127586

but it is kind of hard to go through it all and find the relevant info.

[jhunter1163]

Poster Reheat has an excellent debunking of the flight path info in his sig.

[Crazytimes]

His great response to all the info I sent him.

"No way this flight path could have been for another projectile that hit
the pentagon and attributed to flight 77? Can radar identify an actual
flight number? No it cannot."

[R.Mackey]

Flight 77 was tracked (with just one gap) from takeoff to impact, so yes, in fact, it can identify an actual flight number. It also corresponds with an object visually tracked by the C-130 crew (which is also shown on RADAR, and was squawking Mode 3, i.e. was actively identifying itself on the logs).

The complainant also insists that the "decoy" aircraft flew through this airspace at this time -- yet there's only one object on the logs. So... a "stealth" aircraft? How stupid is that?

As I said, you're dealing with an irrational person.

[DGM]

Whenever I come across one of these fanatics all I do is point at "www.infowars" and laugh. At most rational sites the pig pile soon after causes the fruit loop to implode (proving conclusively the "fruit loop" part).

[Crazytimes]

Flight 77 was tracked (with just one gap) from takeoff to impact, so yes, in fact, it can identify an actual flight number. It also corresponds with an object visually tracked by the C-130 crew (which is also shown on RADAR, and was squawking Mode 3, i.e. was actively identifying itself on the logs).

The complainant also insists that the "decoy" aircraft flew through this airspace at this time -- yet there's only one object on the logs. So... a "stealth" aircraft? How stupid is that?

As I said, you're dealing with an irrational person.

I told him basically the same thing. If there were a missle/rocket or whatever these nuts think, would RADES pick it up ?

Not knowing how RADES actually works I couldnt argue with him about this but he thinks the entire data was faked. I am giving up on him. He is as most truthers not wanting to learnt he truth. He wants his version to be true.

[R.Mackey]

There are "stealth" missiles under development, and that's all I'm going to say about that. But the claim is that a decoy aircraft -- vaguely resembling a jetliner, which is not stealthy at all -- flew over the Pentagon. RADAR proves this is simply not the case.

The RADAR trace that is there lines up perfectly with the light poles, the FDR data, the damage path at the Pentagon, and a majority of eyewitnesses. It also ends abruptly at the Pentagon wall. The discussion is over.

[A W Smith]

http://www.geocities.com/someguyyoudontknow33/witnesses.htm

[Edx]

Here (http://62.204.241.30/public/) is the moved archive of John Farmer's data, hosted by user Klimax, including RADAR, tower communications, and so on ad infinitum.


links there dont work :(

[A W Smith]

links there dont work :(
Thats odd. Iv'e never seen a site with nothing but emule ed2k links before. Emule opens but the files are unavailable (red bar)

[Edx]

btw forgive my ignorence can someone sum up in a paragraph why the radar data seemes to suggest the plane going north over Citgo? Ive read some stuff about it but I am still a confused. (dont worry Im not suggesting a CT)

[R.Mackey]

It'll be a pretty short paragraph, because it doesn't. The radar has AA 77 on an almost perfectly straight heading through the light poles for several miles.

[Edx]

It'll be a pretty short paragraph, because it doesn't. The radar has AA 77 on an almost perfectly straight heading through the light poles for several miles.

Ok in that case, what is the claim regarding the animation that the CIT say show a north flight path? I was also watching a CIT debunking video by Jim Hoffman and he talked about it (but said they released bogus radar data in order to make CIt look stupid)

[R.Mackey]

The author corrected magnetic vs. true north the wrong way.

Or there was one that appeared to do a spline fit between very widely spaced radar points, and is not accurate at all.

Or there's the NTSB animation that shows a pretty basic, straight dive that starts way too high...

Who cares? The radar data trumps any and all animations. Don't be led astray.

ETA: Here -- This post (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=4274647#post4274647) from John Farmer has the best collection of radar data and unambiguously confirms the "official story" flight path. After reading this, if you still want to continue arguing with people denser than neutronium, you're on your own.

[Edx]

After reading this, if you still want to continue arguing with people denser than neutronium, you're on your own.

Lol. thanks :)

Incidentally why it is CIT loonies are the most disgustingly venomous ones? Are they all just trying to emulate Aldo and Craig you think?

[Longfellow]

...(snip)

Incidentally why it is CIT loonies are the most disgustingly venomous ones? Are they all just trying to emulate Aldo and Craig you think?

Probably because they're not emulating Aldo and Craig. They are Aldo and Craig.

[Klimax]

Efficiently, the best evidence against that stupid proposed alternate flight path is that the real flight path was observed on RADAR. Here (http://62.204.241.30/public/) is the moved archive of John Farmer's data, hosted by user Klimax, including RADAR, tower communications, and so on ad infinitum.

Also, this (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=3966936#post3966936) is what those morons actually believe.

I strongly advise you not to waste much time on such people. They are not rational.

Thats odd. Iv'e never seen a site with nothing but emule ed2k links before. Emule opens but the files are unavailable (red bar)

My apology. I had to tempoarily to stop emule. But I am running http session and I'll see what directories you need.

This thread is usded by me for announcements:
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=142746

Coincidentally I have just allowed FAA directory.

ETA: Maybe which files are wanted I can get them up faster.

(eMule will be restarted after move to new harddrive!)

[Klimax]

Thats odd. Iv'e never seen a site with nothing but emule ed2k links before. Emule opens but the files are unavailable (red bar)

And it was done at time I thought (wrongly) I had only 18kB both ways.

It won't be updated for sometime until I be sure that http server will be running well. ( Motherboard/RAM lock-ups when high memory load)

[e^n]

All of these files should be available from http://aal77.com .. If you cannot find them there, send me a PM and i will check the index manually.

I appreciate that navigation may be difficult, but I have no motivation to change it at the moment. Truthers clearly haven't advanced their arguments since I last posted and it's unlikely we're going to see anything huge.

[Klimax]

All of these files should be available from http://aal77.com .. If you cannot find them there, send me a PM and i will check the index manually.

I appreciate that navigation may be difficult, but I have no motivation to change it at the moment. Truthers clearly haven't advanced their arguments since I last posted and it's unlikely we're going to see anything huge.

That's better as I think you have more bandwidth than I. (I can allow only 50kB for all downloads in total)

However I had already served two big requests...

If anything is missing at aal,I can take a look. (Best would be to search my index as it is almost complete and only handfull of newest files are missing,which are however available through http already)

ETA: e^n,you should add info about it to the other thread as I do,so we have it at one location.

[Crazytimes]

A little update on my crazy friend. I am one or two more emails away from giving up on him. We were discussing flight 77 hitting the pentagon and of course I told him there is a list of over 100 people who saw the plane hit the pentagon, you just cant argue that.

His response - How do we know who these people on the list are ? How do we not know it was made up ? He also said the same about the DNA found in the pentagon. He said theDNA was found according to who ? Who idewntified the DNA ?

As you can see he is impossible to have any discussion with. He likes to bring up the governments past to try to prove that they are covering up 9/11.

Anyway, one last question. I know I have read here that Steven Jones own data actually proves the paint chips he found was NOT thermite. Can someone go into that further. Is it something about a critical element being missing ?

Thanks again !!

[BigAl]

A little update on my crazy friend. I am one or two more emails away from giving up on him. We were discussing flight 77 hitting the pentagon and of course I told him there is a list of over 100 people who saw the plane hit the pentagon, you just cant argue that.

His response - How do we know who these people on the list are ? How do we not know it was made up ? He also said the same about the DNA found in the pentagon. He said theDNA was found according to who ? Who idewntified the DNA ?


The correct response is to ask them how all these people were misquoted and how in 8 years, none of them have seen their name in the media and said "I didn't say that!".


Oh, wait. Someone has and it's for a Truth Movement quote.

Washington Newsman Mike Walters shown how Truthers have twisted his
9/11 reporting;

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=1dd_1177892305

[Crazytimes]

Also, can someone explain to me how nanothermite would be any stronger than regular thermite ?

[Brattus]

Nano or as the "real" scientist call it super duper thermite is stronger because not only is it super but it is also duper.

[R.Mackey]

Short and sweet discussion on the nanothermite garbage here (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=146957).

ETA: Another one here (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=141605). Egad, we've talked this stuff through hundreds of times already...

Real, laboratory-manufactured nanothermite, as reported by Tillotsen et al. (2003) is approximately 60% weaker than ordinary thermite in terms of energy content. This is because as the aluminum (or substitute metal) grains get smaller, the inert oxide coating they all inevitably develop over time and exposure to air becomes a significant fraction of their total volume.

The whole idea of nanothermite as a demolition agent is grade-A, eye-spinning, drooling, Napoleon XIV crazy.

[Edx]

Hey Ryan,

What is it you said real nano-thermite was created for? I seem to remember you describing it once but I didnt understand it too well.

[R.Mackey]

Just because, as near as I can tell.

I can see an application for this stuff in spacecraft pyros, for instance -- say we want to cut a thin metal bracket, with extreme precision, that keeps a spring compressed until it's time to separate a payload from its shroud. We don't require much energy, all that much heat, or a shockwave of any type. But we do require rapid and uniform ignition, and absolute safety, meaning insensitivity to vibration and impact, static discharge, and moderately high temperatures. The stuff would probably work well in this context, being chemically simpler and less shock- or temperature-sensitive than any other explosive I can think of.

A competing technology is a thing called a frangibolt (http://www.tiniaerospace.com/frangibolt.html), which is not explosive at all, instead using a "smart wire" style material that changes shape and exerts a force upon heating. These are also quite safe, but they're slow and can't be timed precisely. You wouldn't want to try to ripple-fire a bunch of these if they needed to go off at once.

In any demolition context, I just don't see why you'd even consider nanothermite. It doesn't appear to be competitive with traditional techniques -- indeed, it isn't clear that it would work at all -- and it costs a ruddy fortune.

[Edx]

Ok cool,

One more question, if you had a pot of thermite a pot of thermate and pot of nano-thermite each over the top of a steel block....

....what would happen? So what Im asking is how would the reactions differ from each other?

[R.Mackey]

Take a look at the thermite burn conducted by EMRTC in the recent National Geographic special. Once started, the reaction sparks violently, ultimately boiling the thermite out of the container and inflicting virtually no damage -- it scatters itself before it can transfer most of that heat.

In the case of thermate, the reaction would be slightly hotter and leave different, but visually indistinguishable, metallic oxide powder residue.

In the case of nanothermite, the reaction would progress much faster, basically scattering the stuff all over within less than a second, I'd guess. This one might even produce a fireball, but it would be over quickly and inflict even less damage than the other two cases.

The key problem of any thermite application is containment. It has to stay in contact with the target material for a long period of time. The steel columns Truthers fantasize about have to be warmed all the way through, and that takes at least a minute or two. Reacting the stuff uncontained over a large steel block will cause it to spread and only melt superficially -- all the videos you've seen of thermite melting right through steel use car hoods, computer casings, flower pots, etc., all relatively thin materials. When applied to a thicker material, it has an opportunity to find an alternate path, either running off to the side or boiling out of a pit. Speeding up the reaction ala nanothermite is a bug, not a feature.

[Edx]

Thanks Ryan. Its great you're here. :)

[jaydeehess]

There are "stealth" missiles under development, and that's all I'm going to say about that. But the claim is that a decoy aircraft -- vaguely resembling a jetliner, which is not stealthy at all -- flew over the Pentagon. RADAR proves this is simply not the case.

We also know that the missile conjecture is nonsense for several reasons.
1) the damage to the front wall was 90-100 feet of missing brick and concrete whereas the inner wall suffered only a small exit hole. A blast would have been much more omnidirectional in its effects.
2) again with the direction of the damage inside the building we have the initial damage limited primarily to the ground and second floor whereas a missile explosion would have torn through several floors above the impact floor. (especially given that the floors were wooden and the front wall concrete)
3) the generator was moved towards the building indicating that the force came from a direction out from the building rather than from the building's location.