We are currently reviewing the calculations and will publish a revision with the proper formula(s)/calculations consistent with the premise of this article. We apologize for any confusion and thank you for your understanding
So that's what is taking so long. they are still looking for a way to calculate the trajectory that will fit their contention that the plane could not hit the building.
Yep, critical thinking at its finest!
Please list all the South side of the Citgo witnesses who state seeing it on the South side. Please provide video evidence of these witnesses and be sure to ask them if they saw the plane hitting light poles.
As pointed out several times, most people would have no reason whatsoever to use the CITGO as a reference in describing the position of the plane. Instead they used the frame of reference of where they were when it went over.
To call these people years later and ask them to place the plane with respect to the gas station is just plain idiotic.
"at the interviewer's coaching" is such a garbage claim and totally unsubstantiated and displays your true bias.
(not a verbatim transcript but close enough. If you dispute it then post and exact transcript)
"Where did you see the plane?
"Over there" points above the station.
"You mean the wing was over the station or the whole plane?"
" Well maybe only the wing"
"The whole wing or just the wing tip?"
"It was part of the wing"
"So the fuselage went over the pavement?"
"uh, yeah"
"over those trees?"
"uh, yeah"
Basically Robert had originally pointed that the plane went over the station and with coaching had it flying with only (maybe) the starboard wingtip over the canopy. Had his original position been accepted it could have been that his angle, the speed of the craft and the split second with which to judge distance that Robert saw the plane south of the station. we will never know since he was coached into having the plane elsewhere.
So his viewpoint is a lot like this :
Really? Must be the lens used on that camera. Makes the road seem a lot closer to the heliport. Would he even have been able to see the CITGO? The pentacon page says that he would be higher and farther back from where the picture was taken. Did anyone think to take a picture facing the exact opposite way showing the heliport? Was the camera on a leveled tripod or handheld?
"It would be on my right or the gas station's left. If I'm looking out my window cause I'm looking toward the gas station.....it would be on my right hand side."
To the left of the gas station? That would be south. Gas station's do not have personal left's and right's. Oddly enough with all the calling you do for eyewitnesses to place the plane either north or south of the station. This statement says neither.
Again, with a highway overpass between him and the CITGO would Levi be able to see the station from where he states he was?
He says he had to turn to see the aircraft. How far from the building was it when he turned? Obviously if he watched it pass he would be turning to follow it.
Again, for all the bluster about having witnesses state "south or north" Levi does not state either.
His description would match the accepted flight path if he was off at all on the distance to the aircraft.
Like Levi and the CITGO witnesses; Sean also believes the plane hit the building while his placement of it proves that it could not have.
Yes, they ALL believe that the plane HIT the Pentagon. none of them have any trouble believeing that it hit the lower floors rather than the upper floors. IF the plane flew 77 feet higher than we are told it did then one would assume that at least ONE witness would have been puzzled that it was said to have hit the ground floor. None were.
Turcois did not see the impact because from where he was the plane goes over the overpass and desends below his line of sight never to emerge above the level of the overpass again. All he sees is the fireball rising above that sight line. Well if Robert could not see the ground level of the Pentagon how could Levi see the single storey gas station from his position with the overpass and several trees in the way?
IIRC correctly Brooks says the plane went north of the station BUT he saw it fly all the way to the Pentagon and impact. From where he was he could see the building well. Regardless of from where he believes it came, he says he saw it HIT, not fly over.
Paik could see neither the Pentagon or the gas station. His account easily fits the accepted flight path as pointed out in another thread.
That is enough derail for me on this. If you want to hash this over more then ressurect one of Lyte's threads on the subject. I will address this no more in THIS thread.
