CIT Fraud Revealed - Page 4

HyJinX · 25th January 2010, 09:04 AM

Originally Posted by mudlark

Bet you wish you had ONE SOC witness?
I know which would catch MY eye more..a ´FREAKIN HUGE´ explosion.

Roosevelt Roberts saw a FREAKIN HUGE ´commercial plane´ ´after the explosion hit´ ´50-100 ft agl´..

Bet you wish, after all the time, money and effort you've put into your NoC claims and research, that you didn't have to constantly defend it and that people would just buy into it so you would be whatever it is you want to be. You've been at this quite a while now...don't you think that if your "evidence" had any merit to it that that the 9/11 truth movement would embrace you and that you'd be known all over the world for bringing down the evil gubmit?

...or are you simply satisfied with continually arguing your non-existent gobble-de-gook on internet forums?

leftysergeant · 25th January 2010, 09:28 AM

Can Paik even see the Navy Annex from his shop? I didn't see it in the video or the GIF. Are you sure he has even visualized the position of the Annex in relation to his shop?

As for Anlauf, the palne looked almost close enough to touch because, from her position, it looked FREAKIN' HUGE.

I well remember one incident when I had mechanical problems on my truck dead in the middle of the runway at Seymour-Johnson just as a BUFF was about to land on minimum fuel. I barely managed to get off the runway. When the plane passed me, it looked roughly the size of battleship. Panic can distort your perception of size and distance.

JimBenArm · 25th January 2010, 09:29 AM

Originally Posted by leftysergeant

Can Paik even see the Navy Annex from his shop? I didn't see it in the video or the GIF. Are you sure he has even visualized the position of the Annex in relation to his shop?

As for Anlauf, the palne looked almost close enough to touch because, from her position, it looked FREAKIN' HUGE.

I well remember one incident when I had mechanical problems on my truck dead in the middle of the runway at Seymour-Johnson just as a BUFF was about to land on minimum fuel. I barely managed to get off the runway. When the plane passed me, it looked roughly the size of battleship. Panic can distort your perception of size and distance.

So you're saying a battleship almost landed on you?

leftysergeant · 25th January 2010, 09:36 AM

Originally Posted by JimBenArm

So you're saying a battleship almost landed on you?

Actually, I just took people's word that it was a b-52. But it did look big enough to be a battle ship. Of course a battleship would not have been moving 800MPH.

JimBenArm · 25th January 2010, 09:37 AM

Originally Posted by leftysergeant

Actually, I just took people's word that it was a b-52. But it did look big enough to be a battle ship. Of course a battleship would not have been moving 800MPH.

According to truther math, it could move twice that speed.

Dave Rogers · 25th January 2010, 09:44 AM

Originally Posted by JimBenArm

According to truther math, it could move twice that speed.

Let's see. Length (160 feet) x maximum takeoff weight (488,000lb) / service ceiling (50,000 feet) = 1560mph.

Damn it, you're right!

Dave

Mr.Herbert · 25th January 2010, 10:16 AM

Originally Posted by leftysergeant

Can Paik even see the Navy Annex from his shop? I didn't see it in the video or the GIF. Are you sure he has even visualized the position of the Annex in relation to his shop?

Here is the view.

tsig · 25th January 2010, 10:27 AM

Originally Posted by JimBenArm

According to truther math, it could move twice that speed.

I think the debunker picture is becoming clear.

Battleships traveling at 1600 mph hit the buildings.

You debunkers official story just keeps getting more and more weird.

ETA: sorry to see you've drunk the Kool Aid Dave but with all your math you forgot one thing. It would take an experienced captain to aim his boat and hit those towers not some troglodyte towel wearers.

Dumb All Over · 25th January 2010, 10:43 AM

Hi Mudlark,

I'm sure my question has has been answered before but I can't seem to find it in the forums. It is important for perspective's sake that I know who I'm directing questions and answers to. Are you Craig or are you Aldo?

Thanks,
DAO

jaydeehess · 25th January 2010, 10:46 AM

Originally Posted by mudlark

http://i659.photobucket.com/albums/u...ikwingspan.jpg

There ya go. 124.52ft
getting desperate now AWSmith?

Interesting!
Although this is where he draws the path of the plane it would put the plane more than twice its wingspan north of the VDOT tower which the next day Paik speculates may have been clipped by the plane.
We note that if Paik was in the parking lot where the CiT interviewed him he cannot see the roof of the Annex but he can see the VDOT tower.

At best this suggests that Paik's drawing is incorrect. It is unlikely that he would have wondered if the plane had clipped the tower if he never saw the plane anywhere close top the tower and especially if it were more than a wingspan north. However given that he cannot see the Annex from where he was he could easily be incorrect in his estimation of where the Annex is.

Now if the port wing actually was within a few feet of the Sheraton (as Alauf's literal statement suggests) AND the center of the fuselage within 75 feet of the VDOT tower (which would certainly allow Paik's next day consideration to be a valid speculation) it would mean that the plane was essentially following Columbia Pike, along a path that would take it south of the Citgo.

jaydeehess · 25th January 2010, 10:57 AM

Originally Posted by leftysergeant

Can Paik even see the Navy Annex from his shop? I didn't see it in the video or the GIF. Are you sure he has even visualized the position of the Annex in relation to his shop?

As for Anlauf, the palne looked almost close enough to touch because, from her position, it looked FREAKIN' HUGE.

I well remember one incident when I had mechanical problems on my truck dead in the middle of the runway at Seymour-Johnson just as a BUFF was about to land on minimum fuel. I barely managed to get off the runway. When the plane passed me, it looked roughly the size of battleship. Panic can distort your perception of size and distance.

An additional anecdote;

I was at the glideslope shack and done my work there when I asked ATC ground control for clearance back to the shop. It was refused as there were several inbound aircraft. I was told to call back in 30 minutes. I went out to watch the planes land which put me only a few dozen feet from the edge of the runway.

I watched as the first a/c came in, a 747. It seemed slow and unspectacular until it touched down. Only then is it obvious that it is moving at 2 1/2 to 3 times a car's highway speed and just how freakin huge it really is. As it passed me I could have sworn that I was under the wing, and the main gear, and possibly the nose gear as well, was definately on the ground.

Even without panic one's estimation of the size, distance and elevation of an aircraft can be quite a bit off. I had time to watch a plane, which I had utterly no trepidation about, come in while the 9/11 witnesses had seconds as they witnessed an aircraft that they did not know was coming and which was well off the path of aircraft they were used to being on approach to National.
I wonder how that might affect their accuracy?

Now, mudlark, we have already established that if Paik and Morin saw the plane then it was not where Middleton put it over Patton Drive.
Correct or not?

beachnut · 25th January 2010, 11:48 AM

Originally Posted by mudlark

...

76 degrees of bank and 4.1 Gs to make it to the flyover not counting time to roll in and out; oops, another impossible turn; unless you have a witness who saw 76 degrees of bank. Got one?

It is funny Paik points to the south flight path and you post a 76 degree bank turn required lie, delusion, pure stupid turn that never happened. Do you get paid to post idiotic delusions?

How fast does a 757 roll into 76 degree of bank? This if real funny because by the time the jets rolls into 76 degree of bank after passing the CITGO, it would be past the Pentagon and miss the flyover. Math is a real good thing to have when you work with CIT and p4t who can't do math. Did you try physics? Got any skills beside posting lies from CIT?

Please tell us the roll rate for the 757; got any clues?

Gamolon · 25th January 2010, 11:53 AM

Originally Posted by BCR

Yep, Craig made a new little video covering Shinki.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Thanks Craig! You just verified the 'official flight path' and revealed that you were aware that Paik was NOT where you filmed him for your 'fantasy recreation'. You guys crack me up

Question.

People are bring up "shadows".

At 1:47-1:48 in the video above, Shinki says that a shadow of the plane appeared INSIDE his office. If the center/body of the plane was over TOP of his office, is it possible for a shadow to be cast IN his office?

If you take the end of the wingtip (62 feet from center) and with the sun being at 42 degrees, doesn't that put the plane's wingtip at a height of about 55ft?

Am I looking this right?

DGM · 25th January 2010, 12:19 PM

The plane in that case would have hit the Sheridon (?) hotel.

W.D.Clinger · 25th January 2010, 12:21 PM

Fish in a barrel...

Originally Posted by mudlark

You want ONE NOC flightpath from a group of eyewitnesses?
Balsamo has done the math using numerous parameters including the official 540mph speed.
I´ve linked to it 10 times.
Your own ´expert´ already admitted that there had been no math done in response to debunk it.

Yes, mudlark has linked to the Balsamo/Desideri paper many times. Several of us have pointed out that pages 1 and 4 of that paper contain mistakes. Instead of addressing the math, mudlark's been telling us to take it up with Balsamo, whose 11.2g/10.14g/2223g/58g calculations were off by a factor of 5 to 1000+ and have become a running joke.

Originally Posted by mudlark

I´ve been following your posts champ on other threads. SAME words over and over.
No links, no math, nothing.
The math HAS been provided.
Bye bye. You´re on ignore bore.

Oh dear: mudlark appears to be telling fibs.

Several people here have provided links to legitimate mathematics that refute mudlark's and/or Balsamo's assertions. It is mudlark who has steadfastly refused to discuss mathematics or physics here.

Originally Posted by mudlark

You can't calculate where the shadow would be without knowing the altitude of the plane. If the plane "almost hit my roof" as Edward claimed and was "only about 3 feet above the Navy Annex" as claimed by Darius Prather there is no reason it couldn't have cast a shadow over Shinki's shop from the north path.

North of the Tropic of Cancer, it would be quite remarkable for any object's solar shadow to fall south of the object itself. I'm talking about planet Earth, of course; shadows may behave differently on TrutherWorld.

twinstead · 25th January 2010, 12:40 PM

Trutherworld would be a cool addition to Walt Disney World. There could be the roller coaster sensation called Squib of Terror, a holographic plane ride, manufactured phone calls from famous people, Idiots of the Caribbean, Haunted Klinkety Klunk Mansion.

If they serve beer I'm THERE!

CompusMentus · 25th January 2010, 01:23 PM

Originally Posted by twinstead

Trutherworld would be a cool addition to Walt Disney World. There could be the roller coaster sensation called Squib of Terror, a holographic plane ride, manufactured phone calls from famous people, Idiots of the Caribbean, Haunted Klinkety Klunk Mansion.
If they serve beer I'm THERE!

:=]

errrm "One Flew Over the Pentagon"? "North Side Story"? "Rebel Without the Foggiest"?

I'll get me coat........

Compus

CurtC · 25th January 2010, 01:27 PM

I wouldn't visit any amusement parks where my safety depends on the engineering expertise of Truthers.

jaydeehess · 25th January 2010, 08:11 PM

Originally Posted by DGM

The plane in that case would have hit the Sheridon (?) hotel.

,and possibly the Annex? 55 feet is only 5 stories

Pi_314 · 25th January 2010, 09:41 PM

Body and a shadow of a body?

Thats what it sounds like at the 2.29 mark of the irreconcilable brothers film with ole Eddy the mechanic. Sometimes you miss things when editing to commit fraud. I'll wager the unedited version would be a laugh a minute. Bet you will never see that version.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

dtugg · 25th January 2010, 10:15 PM

I wonder if the CITiots are fully aware of the extent of their fraud, or if they have somehow deluded themselves into not seeing it.

tsig · 25th January 2010, 10:30 PM

Originally Posted by dtugg

I wonder if the CITiots are fully aware of the extent of their fraud, or if they have somehow deluded themselves into not seeing it.

I'm sure they think they're doing it for a Higher Cause. Kinda like the liars for Jesus.

Hokulele · 25th January 2010, 11:09 PM

Originally Posted by tsig

I'm sure they think they're doing it for a Higher Cause.

$$

dtugg · 25th January 2010, 11:23 PM

Originally Posted by Hokulele

$$

I would agree that money may be a possible motive except for the fact that there is no way that they have made any money off of this ridiculous charade. With the plane tickets alone, I would bet that they have lost a ton of money. And then factor in the likely thousands of hours they have spent on this crap. There is no way that they have sold enough DVDs to cover all of this. And also, Craig apparently has a good job paying over 100k/year. I just can't see money being a motive in this. I think that they are either literally insane, or it is about inflating their egos, or some combination thereof.

Hokulele · 25th January 2010, 11:26 PM

Well, I think it all goes back to the complete inability to admit making mistakes that has been seen repeatedly when dealing with 9/11 CTists. I am guessing that at the beginning, the Dyspeptic Duo saw the money being made by people like Avery and thought they could replicate that success. Even though they are most likely losing money over this whole nonsense, they simply cannot admit that it was a mistake from the get-go.

Jonnyclueless · 25th January 2010, 11:26 PM

If you guys think this stuff is crazy you shoulda seen Craig and Aldo's conspiracy theory before they came up with this silly concoction. They used to claim that the plane parts were planted and pointed to a white passenger van in the pictures as the van used to transport all of the plane parts at the scene.

I couldn't make this stuff up.

BCR · 25th January 2010, 11:28 PM

Originally Posted by tsig

I'm sure they think they're doing it for a Higher Cause. Kinda like the liars for Jesus.

They are NWO operatives tasked with discrediting the 911 Truth Movement by making it look like a bunch of crazy morons. They have been very successful in their assignment and I was told at the last NWO meeting that they might be promoted to run the Memphis NWO operation.

dtugg · 25th January 2010, 11:29 PM

Originally Posted by Hokulele

Well, I think it all goes back to the complete inability to admit making mistakes that has been seen repeatedly when dealing with 9/11 CTists. I am guessing that at the beginning, the Dyspeptic Duo saw the money being made by people like Avery and thought they could replicate that success. Even though they are most likely losing money over this whole nonsense, they simply cannot admit that it was a mistake from the get-go.

Good point. This is also possible.

dtugg · 25th January 2010, 11:33 PM

Originally Posted by BCR

They are NWO operatives tasked with discrediting the 911 Truth Movement by making it look like a bunch of crazy morons. They have been very successful in their assignment and I was told at the last NWO meeting that they might be promoted to run the Memphis NWO operation.

I think that this is about a billion times more likely than the NoC/Pentagon flyover idea. Although that doesn't really say much.

PS: Are you John Farmer/911files? If so, I didn't notice that you were back until now. Good to see you again.

BCR · 25th January 2010, 11:44 PM

Originally Posted by dtugg

Are you John Farmer/911files? If so, I didn't notice that you were back until now. Good to see you again.

Did I blow my cover?

mudlark · 26th January 2010, 07:43 AM

Originally Posted by jaydeehess

Interesting!
Although this is where he draws the path of the plane it would put the plane more than twice its wingspan north of the VDOT tower which the next day Paik speculates may have been clipped by the plane.

Again?? Jesus...

Quote:

¨Pickering: Did you actually SEE it hit the tower or you THOUGHT it hit the tower...Did you see the repair guys working on it?

Ed Paik: I DIDN´T SEE IT HIT THE TOWER, I SAW THE GUYS WORKING AT IT THE NEXT MORNING¨

Got that?

Quote:

We note that if Paik was in the parking lot where the CiT interviewed him he cannot see the roof of the Annex but he can see the VDOT tower.

At best this suggests that Paik's drawing is incorrect. It is unlikely that he would have wondered if the plane had clipped the tower if he never saw the plane anywhere close top the tower and especially if it were more than a wingspan north. However given that he cannot see the Annex from where he was he could easily be incorrect in his estimation of where the Annex is.

Now if the port wing actually was within a few feet of the Sheraton (as Alauf's literal statement suggests) AND the center of the fuselage within 75 feet of the VDOT tower (which would certainly allow Paik's next day consideration to be a valid speculation) it would mean that the plane was essentially following Columbia Pike, along a path that would take it south of the Citgo.

Umm..let´s see how ´wrong´ you guys are claiming his description actually was..

Here´s Farmer´s ´JREF accepted´ flightpath

Here is the actual height Farmer claims the plane to be as it passed Ed Paik´s shop (450ft) The Sheraton roof in view.

Just to put this into perspective..the Annex is 70ft tall. The tallest spire of the Air Force Memorial is 270ft tall.
Deb Analuf wouldn´t have even SEEN the plane until it had reached point -3
allegedly descending from almost 250ft ABOVE the Sheraton 460+ft to her and Ed Paik´s right.

Here is where Farmer´s path actually places the plane (-4)

Distance from Paik´s pov to data point -4 = 460 ft

You can cry ´witness subjectivity´ all day but as with the other NOC witnesses, to claim that they are SO spectacularly off is ridiculous.
How does BCR´s above assertions correspond in ANY way whatsoever with what Paik described?

Quote:

´..and then at the time feeling like IT ALMOST HIT MY ROOF´

Don´t pat yourself on the back just yet Jaydeehess.

mudlark · 26th January 2010, 07:49 AM

Originally Posted by jaydeehess

,and possibly the Annex? 55 feet is only 5 stories

The Annex is 23m/70ft.

Thunder · 26th January 2010, 07:51 AM

you know, if truthers spent as much time working for a new investigation, as they spend debating with debunkers on JREF, there would have been a new investigation by now.

***** and giggles. that's all this is about. just ***** and giggles.

Gamolon · 26th January 2010, 07:52 AM

Why do 5 of the 13 witnesses place the plane's flightpath over the annex and everyone else puts the flightpath north of the annex?

Do the 8 eyewitness flightpaths to the north of the annex now invalidate the 5 that say it went over the annex? Who is telling the truth here?

Mudlark?

Thunder · 26th January 2010, 07:59 AM

Originally Posted by Gamolon

Who is telling the truth here?

Mudlark?

i guess you didn't see one of yesterday's stunning admissions.

They do not need truth...all they need is doubt.

Childlike Empress · 26th January 2010, 08:00 AM

Originally Posted by Gamolon

Why do 5 of the 13 witnesses place the plane's flightpath over the annex and everyone else puts the flightpath north of the annex?

That's not true.

It doesn't help btw if you start treating every single testimony as if it were the absolutely exact truth. They are all in range of expectable exactness for witnesses, the closer the plane was to them, the better.

The corroboration is the point which renders the blue line, where nobody saw the plane flying, moot.

Horace Wheeljack · 26th January 2010, 08:05 AM

Mudlark,

Edward Paik says in the CIT interview that the wings were over the road (Columbia Pike), why do you think CIT choose to ignore this and make a reconstruction of the plane completely over the Annex?

Terry Morin states in his interview with CIT that the plane was not completely over the annex but over the edge, why do you think CIT choose to ignore this and make a reconstruction of the plane completely over the annex?

It is clear that CIT have misrepresented these witness accounts in an attempt to support a north of citgo claim. This is very dishonest wouldn't you agree?

Scott Sommers · 26th January 2010, 08:06 AM

Originally Posted by parky76

you know, if truthers spent as much time working for a new investigation, as they spend debating with debunkers on JREF, there would have been a new investigation by now.

***** and giggles. that's all this is about. just ***** and giggles.

This is a good point. CIT Truthers talk on JREF. AE911 Truthers talk to each other, but in fact, almost all of them don't do anything except sign their name somewhere. WAC Truthers talk to each other on Facebook. No one seems in the slightest interested in getting themselves noticed. I keep saying this to the Truther freaks we have here, start picketing TV stations or firehouses. No one cares about what you do right now. Do something that really gets attention. Either that or shut up.

Childlike Empress · 26th January 2010, 08:07 AM

@Horace: It doesn't matter, even if it were true. Look at the blue line, the official data. Nowhere north of Columbia Pike.

That's what you should be worried about.

Horace Wheeljack · 26th January 2010, 08:15 AM

CE,

I understand that Paik and Morin's recollections are not exactly on the official path but CIT have fraudulently represented their accounts to support a north of citgo claim. This is thoroughly dishonest.

If they were honest researchers they would have included Paik and Morin as south of citgo witnesses but note that they were placing the plane north of the official path.

25th January 2010, 09:04 AM	#121
HyJinX Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Beyond the Sun Posts: 1,666	Originally Posted by mudlark Bet you wish you had ONE SOC witness? I know which would catch MY eye more..a ´FREAKIN HUGE´ explosion. Roosevelt Roberts saw a FREAKIN HUGE ´commercial plane´ ´after the explosion hit´ ´50-100 ft agl´.. Bet you wish, after all the time, money and effort you've put into your NoC claims and research, that you didn't have to constantly defend it and that people would just buy into it so you would be whatever it is you want to be. You've been at this quite a while now...don't you think that if your "evidence" had any merit to it that that the 9/11 truth movement would embrace you and that you'd be known all over the world for bringing down the evil gubmit? ...or are you simply satisfied with continually arguing your non-existent gobble-de-gook on internet forums?
	__________________ What? You pooped in the refrigerator? And you ate the whole... wheel of cheese? How'd you do that? Heck, I'm not even mad; that's amazing. - Ron Burgundy

25th January 2010, 09:29 AM	#123
JimBenArm Based on a true story! Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Kansas City, MO Posts: 12,985	Originally Posted by leftysergeant Can Paik even see the Navy Annex from his shop? I didn't see it in the video or the GIF. Are you sure he has even visualized the position of the Annex in relation to his shop? As for Anlauf, the palne looked almost close enough to touch because, from her position, it looked FREAKIN' HUGE. I well remember one incident when I had mechanical problems on my truck dead in the middle of the runway at Seymour-Johnson just as a BUFF was about to land on minimum fuel. I barely managed to get off the runway. When the plane passed me, it looked roughly the size of battleship. Panic can distort your perception of size and distance. So you're saying a battleship almost landed on you?
	__________________ *"JimBenArm is right"* Hokulele Mom

25th January 2010, 09:37 AM	#125
JimBenArm Based on a true story! Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Kansas City, MO Posts: 12,985	Originally Posted by leftysergeant Actually, I just took people's word that it was a b-52. But it did look big enough to be a battle ship. Of course a battleship would not have been moving 800MPH. According to truther math, it could move twice that speed.
	__________________ *"JimBenArm is right"* Hokulele Mom

25th January 2010, 09:44 AM	#126
Dave Rogers Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: In a world lit only by fire. Posts: 17,894	Originally Posted by JimBenArm According to truther math, it could move twice that speed. Let's see. Length (160 feet) x maximum takeoff weight (488,000lb) / service ceiling (50,000 feet) = 1560mph. Damn it, you're right! Dave
	__________________ "We will punish the murderer together. Our punishment will be more generosity, more tolerance and more democracy." - Fabian Stang, Mayor of Oslo SSKCAS, covert member

25th January 2010, 10:16 AM	#127
Mr.Herbert Graduate Poster Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Massachusetts Posts: 1,357	Originally Posted by leftysergeant Can Paik even see the Navy Annex from his shop? I didn't see it in the video or the GIF. Are you sure he has even visualized the position of the Annex in relation to his shop? Here is the view.
	__________________ Please go to www.curedfoundation.org and make a donation of only a dollar to help find a cure for a rare autoimmune disease that my son is currently battling called Eosinophilic Esophagitis. Learn more about EOE here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eosinophilic_esophagitis

25th January 2010, 09:28 AM	#122
leftysergeant Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Spanaway WA Posts: 18,613	Can Paik even see the Navy Annex from his shop? I didn't see it in the video or the GIF. Are you sure he has even visualized the position of the Annex in relation to his shop? As for Anlauf, the palne looked almost close enough to touch because, from her position, it looked FREAKIN' HUGE. I well remember one incident when I had mechanical problems on my truck dead in the middle of the runway at Seymour-Johnson just as a BUFF was about to land on minimum fuel. I barely managed to get off the runway. When the plane passed me, it looked roughly the size of battleship. Panic can distort your perception of size and distance.

25th January 2010, 09:36 AM	#124
leftysergeant Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Spanaway WA Posts: 18,613	Originally Posted by JimBenArm So you're saying a battleship almost landed on you? Actually, I just took people's word that it was a b-52. But it did look big enough to be a battle ship. Of course a battleship would not have been moving 800MPH.

25th January 2010, 10:27 AM	#128
tsig a carbon based life-form Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 26,800	Originally Posted by JimBenArm According to truther math, it could move twice that speed. I think the debunker picture is becoming clear. Battleships traveling at 1600 mph hit the buildings. You debunkers official story just keeps getting more and more weird. ETA: sorry to see you've drunk the Kool Aid Dave but with all your math you forgot one thing. It would take an experienced captain to aim his boat and hit those towers not some troglodyte towel wearers.
	Last edited by tsig; 25th January 2010 at 10:32 AM.

25th January 2010, 10:43 AM	#129
Dumb All Over A Little Ugly on the Side Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: They call it the Earth (which is a dumb kinda name) Posts: 3,693	Hi Mudlark, I'm sure my question has has been answered before but I can't seem to find it in the forums. It is important for perspective's sake that I know who I'm directing questions and answers to. Are you Craig or are you Aldo? Thanks, DAO
	__________________ The Three Word Story Pledge of Allegiance-- "I Hereby swear upon Engelbert's grave that I will gallop, not stride run, not walk posting three words on Shemp's honor, honoring: bananas, dwarfs, clarinets, [the 7th naughty word], haggis, Batman, nuns, wombats until such time as I'm sober. Or dead." "Some people have a way with words, other people...Um...Oh...Uh, not have way." --Steve Martin

25th January 2010, 10:46 AM	#130
jaydeehess Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: I beedunk 40 miles from the border Posts: 10,828	Originally Posted by mudlark http://i659.photobucket.com/albums/u...ikwingspan.jpg There ya go. 124.52ft getting desperate now AWSmith? Interesting! Although this is where he draws the path of the plane it would put the plane more than twice its wingspan north of the VDOT tower which the next day Paik speculates may have been clipped by the plane. We note that if Paik was in the parking lot where the CiT interviewed him he cannot see the roof of the Annex but he can see the VDOT tower. At best this suggests that Paik's drawing is incorrect. It is unlikely that he would have wondered if the plane had clipped the tower if he never saw the plane anywhere close top the tower and especially if it were more than a wingspan north. However given that he cannot see the Annex from where he was he could easily be incorrect in his estimation of where the Annex is. Now if the port wing actually was within a few feet of the Sheraton (as Alauf's literal statement suggests) AND the center of the fuselage within 75 feet of the VDOT tower (which would certainly allow Paik's next day consideration to be a valid speculation) it would mean that the plane was essentially following Columbia Pike, along a path that would take it south of the Citgo.

25th January 2010, 10:57 AM	#131
jaydeehess Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: I beedunk 40 miles from the border Posts: 10,828	Originally Posted by leftysergeant Can Paik even see the Navy Annex from his shop? I didn't see it in the video or the GIF. Are you sure he has even visualized the position of the Annex in relation to his shop? As for Anlauf, the palne looked almost close enough to touch because, from her position, it looked FREAKIN' HUGE. I well remember one incident when I had mechanical problems on my truck dead in the middle of the runway at Seymour-Johnson just as a BUFF was about to land on minimum fuel. I barely managed to get off the runway. When the plane passed me, it looked roughly the size of battleship. Panic can distort your perception of size and distance. An additional anecdote; I was at the glideslope shack and done my work there when I asked ATC ground control for clearance back to the shop. It was refused as there were several inbound aircraft. I was told to call back in 30 minutes. I went out to watch the planes land which put me only a few dozen feet from the edge of the runway. I watched as the first a/c came in, a 747. It seemed slow and unspectacular until it touched down. Only then is it obvious that it is moving at 2 1/2 to 3 times a car's highway speed and just how freakin huge it really is. As it passed me I could have sworn that I was under the wing, and the main gear, and possibly the nose gear as well, was definately on the ground. Even without panic one's estimation of the size, distance and elevation of an aircraft can be quite a bit off. I had time to watch a plane, which I had utterly no trepidation about, come in while the 9/11 witnesses had seconds as they witnessed an aircraft that they did not know was coming and which was well off the path of aircraft they were used to being on approach to National. I wonder how that might affect their accuracy? Now, mudlark, we have already established that if Paik and Morin saw the plane then it was not where Middleton put it over Patton Drive. Correct or not?
	Last edited by jaydeehess; 25th January 2010 at 10:59 AM.

25th January 2010, 11:48 AM	#132
beachnut Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Dog House Posts: 19,904	math is good, CIT is mathless Originally Posted by mudlark ... 76 degrees of bank and 4.1 Gs to make it to the flyover not counting time to roll in and out; oops, another impossible turn; unless you have a witness who saw 76 degrees of bank. Got one? It is funny Paik points to the south flight path and you post a 76 degree bank turn required lie, delusion, pure stupid turn that never happened. Do you get paid to post idiotic delusions? How fast does a 757 roll into 76 degree of bank? This if real funny because by the time the jets rolls into 76 degree of bank after passing the CITGO, it would be past the Pentagon and miss the flyover. Math is a real good thing to have when you work with CIT and p4t who can't do math. Did you try physics? Got any skills beside posting lies from CIT? Please tell us the roll rate for the 757; got any clues?

25th January 2010, 12:19 PM	#134
DGM #4 Join Date: May 2007 Location: West of Northshore MA Posts: 14,350	The plane in that case would have hit the Sheridon (?) hotel.
	__________________ Join the team, Show us what your machine can do (or just contribute to a good cause)Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232 "Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

25th January 2010, 12:21 PM	#135
W.D.Clinger Master Poster Join Date: Oct 2009 Posts: 2,442	Fish in a barrel... Originally Posted by mudlark You want ONE NOC flightpath from a group of eyewitnesses? Balsamo has done the math using numerous parameters including the official 540mph speed. I´ve linked to it 10 times. Your own ´expert´ already admitted that there had been no math done in response to debunk it. Yes, mudlark has linked to the Balsamo/Desideri paper many times. Several of us have pointed out that pages 1 and 4 of that paper contain mistakes. Instead of addressing the math, mudlark's been telling us to take it up with Balsamo, whose 11.2g/10.14g/2223g/58g calculations were off by a factor of 5 to 1000+ and have become a running joke. Originally Posted by mudlark I´ve been following your posts champ on other threads. SAME words over and over. No links, no math, nothing. The math HAS been provided. Bye bye. You´re on ignore bore. Oh dear: mudlark appears to be telling fibs. Several people here have provided links to legitimate mathematics that refute mudlark's and/or Balsamo's assertions. It is mudlark who has steadfastly refused to discuss mathematics or physics here. Originally Posted by mudlark You can't calculate where the shadow would be without knowing the altitude of the plane. If the plane "almost hit my roof" as Edward claimed and was "only about 3 feet above the Navy Annex" as claimed by Darius Prather there is no reason it couldn't have cast a shadow over Shinki's shop from the north path. North of the Tropic of Cancer, it would be quite remarkable for any object's solar shadow to fall south of the object itself. I'm talking about planet Earth, of course; shadows may behave differently on TrutherWorld.

25th January 2010, 12:40 PM	#136
twinstead Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Big corner office in NWO Towers Posts: 11,581	Trutherworld would be a cool addition to Walt Disney World. There could be the roller coaster sensation called Squib of Terror, a holographic plane ride, manufactured phone calls from famous people, Idiots of the Caribbean, Haunted Klinkety Klunk Mansion. If they serve beer I'm THERE!
	__________________ You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your INFORMED opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant. -- Harlan Ellison

25th January 2010, 01:23 PM	#137
CompusMentus Waiting for the Worms Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Wales UK Posts: 1,450	Originally Posted by twinstead Trutherworld would be a cool addition to Walt Disney World. There could be the roller coaster sensation called Squib of Terror, a holographic plane ride, manufactured phone calls from famous people, Idiots of the Caribbean, Haunted Klinkety Klunk Mansion. If they serve beer I'm THERE! :=] errrm "One Flew Over the Pentagon"? "North Side Story"? "Rebel Without the Foggiest"? I'll get me coat........ Compus
	__________________ Tongue-tied and twisted just an earth-bound misfit

25th January 2010, 01:27 PM	#138
CurtC Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Dallas, TX Posts: 4,758	I wouldn't visit any amusement parks where my safety depends on the engineering expertise of Truthers.
	__________________ Is there a God? Find the answer at The Official God FAQ.

25th January 2010, 08:11 PM	#139
jaydeehess Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: I beedunk 40 miles from the border Posts: 10,828	Originally Posted by DGM The plane in that case would have hit the Sheridon (?) hotel. ,and possibly the Annex? 55 feet is only 5 stories

25th January 2010, 10:15 PM	#141
dtugg Banned Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: NWO headquarters Posts: 7,898	I wonder if the CITiots are fully aware of the extent of their fraud, or if they have somehow deluded themselves into not seeing it.

25th January 2010, 10:30 PM	#142
tsig a carbon based life-form Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 26,800	Originally Posted by dtugg I wonder if the CITiots are fully aware of the extent of their fraud, or if they have somehow deluded themselves into not seeing it. I'm sure they think they're doing it for a Higher Cause. Kinda like the liars for Jesus.

25th January 2010, 11:09 PM	#143
Hokulele Official Nemesis Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Trying to decide whether to set defenses against an army, or against mole rats. Posts: 27,275	Originally Posted by tsig I'm sure they think they're doing it for a Higher Cause. $$
	__________________ Yvette: "Blasty! Blasty! Blasty!" Some person: "Why did you shoot that?" Yvette: "Blasty! Blasty! Blasty!" - Tragic Monkey

25th January 2010, 11:23 PM	#144
dtugg Banned Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: NWO headquarters Posts: 7,898	Originally Posted by Hokulele $$ I would agree that money may be a possible motive except for the fact that there is no way that they have made any money off of this ridiculous charade. With the plane tickets alone, I would bet that they have lost a ton of money. And then factor in the likely thousands of hours they have spent on this crap. There is no way that they have sold enough DVDs to cover all of this. And also, Craig apparently has a good job paying over 100k/year. I just can't see money being a motive in this. I think that they are either literally insane, or it is about inflating their egos, or some combination thereof.

25th January 2010, 11:26 PM	#145
Hokulele Official Nemesis Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Trying to decide whether to set defenses against an army, or against mole rats. Posts: 27,275	Well, I think it all goes back to the complete inability to admit making mistakes that has been seen repeatedly when dealing with 9/11 CTists. I am guessing that at the beginning, the Dyspeptic Duo saw the money being made by people like Avery and thought they could replicate that success. Even though they are most likely losing money over this whole nonsense, they simply cannot admit that it was a mistake from the get-go.
	__________________ Yvette: "Blasty! Blasty! Blasty!" Some person: "Why did you shoot that?" Yvette: "Blasty! Blasty! Blasty!" - Tragic Monkey

25th January 2010, 11:26 PM	#146
Jonnyclueless Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 5,360	If you guys think this stuff is crazy you shoulda seen Craig and Aldo's conspiracy theory before they came up with this silly concoction. They used to claim that the plane parts were planted and pointed to a white passenger van in the pictures as the van used to transport all of the plane parts at the scene. I couldn't make this stuff up.

25th January 2010, 11:28 PM	#147
BCR Master Poster Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Memphis Posts: 2,239	Originally Posted by tsig I'm sure they think they're doing it for a Higher Cause. Kinda like the liars for Jesus. They are NWO operatives tasked with discrediting the 911 Truth Movement by making it look like a bunch of crazy morons. They have been very successful in their assignment and I was told at the last NWO meeting that they might be promoted to run the Memphis NWO operation.

25th January 2010, 11:29 PM	#148
dtugg Banned Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: NWO headquarters Posts: 7,898	Originally Posted by Hokulele Well, I think it all goes back to the complete inability to admit making mistakes that has been seen repeatedly when dealing with 9/11 CTists. I am guessing that at the beginning, the Dyspeptic Duo saw the money being made by people like Avery and thought they could replicate that success. Even though they are most likely losing money over this whole nonsense, they simply cannot admit that it was a mistake from the get-go. Good point. This is also possible.

25th January 2010, 11:33 PM	#149
dtugg Banned Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: NWO headquarters Posts: 7,898	Originally Posted by BCR They are NWO operatives tasked with discrediting the 911 Truth Movement by making it look like a bunch of crazy morons. They have been very successful in their assignment and I was told at the last NWO meeting that they might be promoted to run the Memphis NWO operation. I think that this is about a billion times more likely than the NoC/Pentagon flyover idea. Although that doesn't really say much. PS: Are you John Farmer/911files? If so, I didn't notice that you were back until now. Good to see you again.

25th January 2010, 11:44 PM	#150
BCR Master Poster Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Memphis Posts: 2,239	Originally Posted by dtugg Are you John Farmer/911files? If so, I didn't notice that you were back until now. Good to see you again. Did I blow my cover?

26th January 2010, 07:43 AM	#151
mudlark Muse Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 721	Originally Posted by jaydeehess Interesting! Although this is where he draws the path of the plane it would put the plane more than twice its wingspan north of the VDOT tower which the next day Paik speculates may have been clipped by the plane. Again?? Jesus... Quote: ¨Pickering: Did you actually SEE it hit the tower or you THOUGHT it hit the tower...Did you see the repair guys working on it? Ed Paik: I DIDN´T SEE IT HIT THE TOWER, I SAW THE GUYS WORKING AT IT THE NEXT MORNING¨ Got that? Quote: We note that if Paik was in the parking lot where the CiT interviewed him he cannot see the roof of the Annex but he can see the VDOT tower. At best this suggests that Paik's drawing is incorrect. It is unlikely that he would have wondered if the plane had clipped the tower if he never saw the plane anywhere close top the tower and especially if it were more than a wingspan north. However given that he cannot see the Annex from where he was he could easily be incorrect in his estimation of where the Annex is. Now if the port wing actually was within a few feet of the Sheraton (as Alauf's literal statement suggests) AND the center of the fuselage within 75 feet of the VDOT tower (which would certainly allow Paik's next day consideration to be a valid speculation) it would mean that the plane was essentially following Columbia Pike, along a path that would take it south of the Citgo. Umm..let´s see how ´wrong´ you guys are claiming his description actually was.. Here´s Farmer´s ´JREF accepted´ flightpath Here is the actual height Farmer claims the plane to be as it passed Ed Paik´s shop (450ft) The Sheraton roof in view. Just to put this into perspective..the Annex is 70ft tall. The tallest spire of the Air Force Memorial is 270ft tall. Deb Analuf wouldn´t have even SEEN the plane until it had reached point -3 allegedly descending from almost 250ft ABOVE the Sheraton 460+ft to her and Ed Paik´s right. Here is where Farmer´s path actually places the plane (-4) Distance from Paik´s pov to data point -4 = 460 ft You can cry ´witness subjectivity´ all day but as with the other NOC witnesses, to claim that they are SO spectacularly off is ridiculous. How does BCR´s above assertions correspond in ANY way whatsoever with what Paik described? Quote: ´..and then at the time feeling like IT ALMOST HIT MY ROOF´ Don´t pat yourself on the back just yet Jaydeehess.
mudlark Muse Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 721

26th January 2010, 07:49 AM	#152
mudlark Muse Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 721	Originally Posted by jaydeehess ,and possibly the Annex? 55 feet is only 5 stories The Annex is 23m/70ft.
mudlark Muse Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 721

26th January 2010, 07:51 AM	#153
Thunder Banned Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Queens Posts: 34,947	you know, if truthers spent as much time working for a new investigation, as they spend debating with debunkers on JREF, there would have been a new investigation by now. *** and giggles. that's all this is about. just *** and giggles.

26th January 2010, 07:52 AM	#154
Gamolon Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 1,276	Why do 5 of the 13 witnesses place the plane's flightpath over the annex and everyone else puts the flightpath north of the annex? Do the 8 eyewitness flightpaths to the north of the annex now invalidate the 5 that say it went over the annex? Who is telling the truth here? Mudlark?
Gamolon Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 1,276

26th January 2010, 07:59 AM	#155
Thunder Banned Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Queens Posts: 34,947	Originally Posted by Gamolon Who is telling the truth here? Mudlark? i guess you didn't see one of yesterday's stunning admissions. They do not need truth...all they need is doubt.

26th January 2010, 08:00 AM	#156
Childlike Empress Ewige Blumenkraft Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Ivory Tower Posts: 7,860	Originally Posted by Gamolon Why do 5 of the 13 witnesses place the plane's flightpath over the annex and everyone else puts the flightpath north of the annex? That's not true. It doesn't help btw if you start treating every single testimony as if it were the absolutely exact truth. They are all in range of expectable exactness for witnesses, the closer the plane was to them, the better. The corroboration is the point which renders the blue line, where nobody saw the plane flying, moot.
	__________________ Breaking The Set Last edited by Childlike Empress; 26th January 2010 at 08:03 AM.

26th January 2010, 08:05 AM	#157
Horace Wheeljack Scholar Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 87	Mudlark, Edward Paik says in the CIT interview that the wings were over the road (Columbia Pike), why do you think CIT choose to ignore this and make a reconstruction of the plane completely over the Annex? Terry Morin states in his interview with CIT that the plane was not completely over the annex but over the edge, why do you think CIT choose to ignore this and make a reconstruction of the plane completely over the annex? It is clear that CIT have misrepresented these witness accounts in an attempt to support a north of citgo claim. This is very dishonest wouldn't you agree?
Horace Wheeljack Scholar Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 87