A W Smith
Philosopher
Dom has postulated that perhaos Morin saw the Shadow and assumes it was right over him but was actually further north. Bad move Dom.
Last edited:
Challenge to CIT
- Thread starter Reheat
- Start date
-
- Tags
- cit edward paik pentagon
Now the sun is a witness for CIT, and they have analyzed it wrong.
They will have to say the sun is a paid government agent. Who knew...
Sherlock Holmes can relax, CIT analytical abilities are extensive at making the wrong conclusion. Only the wind is pushing the shadow south (not really but for CIT it is). DON'T THEY LOOK AT THEIR OWN EVIDENCE???
Which side of tree does moss grow around the Pentagon's latitude? And why. How bad can you be at this game. CIT wake up and go back to school, or stop doing what makes logic and reason disappear. What are you guys doing?
Did anyone in p4t or CIT take any math past the 8th grade? Parallel and calculating g force, and now a science mess up. All CIT and p4t are good at is being paranoid about government, the military, the FAA, and making up fantasies about 9/11.
They will have to say the sun is a paid government agent. Who knew...
Sherlock Holmes can relax, CIT analytical abilities are extensive at making the wrong conclusion. Only the wind is pushing the shadow south (not really but for CIT it is). DON'T THEY LOOK AT THEIR OWN EVIDENCE???
Which side of tree does moss grow around the Pentagon's latitude? And why. How bad can you be at this game. CIT wake up and go back to school, or stop doing what makes logic and reason disappear. What are you guys doing?
Did anyone in p4t or CIT take any math past the 8th grade? Parallel and calculating g force, and now a science mess up. All CIT and p4t are good at is being paranoid about government, the military, the FAA, and making up fantasies about 9/11.
Last edited:
Confuseling
Irreligious fanatic
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2008
- Messages
- 1,243
All you guys, with your pictures, and your numbers, and your reasoned arguments.
Eyewitness testimony proved the theory of evolution. Why do you think Darwin went to the Channel islands himself?
It was eyewitness testimony that proved that Earth revolved around the Sun, wasn't it. Some bloke, can't remember his name, gazing through a telescope directly at the sun, and not seeing any movement at all. Nor anything else ever again, for that matter, but his sacrifice is noted.
And now, we find ourselves here, you naysayers... naysaying. Well I'm not so cynical. Sure, an eyewitness can make a mistake..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mAnKvo-fPs0
...but two would be something. Statements in triplicate are as good as facts, and if one were quadruple corroborated... Christ... I don't know what I'd do.
[weirdness... video won't work embedded.]
Eyewitness testimony proved the theory of evolution. Why do you think Darwin went to the Channel islands himself?
It was eyewitness testimony that proved that Earth revolved around the Sun, wasn't it. Some bloke, can't remember his name, gazing through a telescope directly at the sun, and not seeing any movement at all. Nor anything else ever again, for that matter, but his sacrifice is noted.
And now, we find ourselves here, you naysayers... naysaying. Well I'm not so cynical. Sure, an eyewitness can make a mistake..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mAnKvo-fPs0
...but two would be something. Statements in triplicate are as good as facts, and if one were quadruple corroborated... Christ... I don't know what I'd do.
[weirdness... video won't work embedded.]
Last edited:
SpitfireIX
Philosopher
But the shadow of an airliner directly over the Citgo station would be to the north.
But the shadow of an airliner directly over the Citgo station would be to the north.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/170604809ec45f1f36.gif
Is that another "Oh bugger!" moment for the CIT?
jhunter1163
beer-swilling semiliterate
From an e-mail I received:
jhunter1163
beer-swilling semiliterate
The NWO moved the Sun to cast shadows at an angle that would discredit the CIT. It's all so obvious now!
NickUK
Critical Thinker
A W Smith
Philosopher
But the shadow of an airliner directly over the Citgo station would be to the north.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/170604809ec45f1f36.gif
Exactly my point last year. If the flight was at 200 feet altitude it would cast a shadow 230 feet north.
About a year ago I speculated that the shadow of the plane might have passed north of the Citgo, which given the speed of the plane and the various view obstructions such as the Citgo canopy, might have caused some of the witness' confusion about the plane's exact path.
At the time, working from the "official" flight path, I ended up concluding that the shadow would still have been too far south to be north of the Citgo, and discarded the hypothesis.
However, since that time I've learned more about the range of uncertainty of the actual path and the altitudes and rates of descent in that region. For instance, the approximately 10 degree bank at impact suggests that the plane was indeed turning slightly to the right, indicating that it came from a slightly more northerly direction in the final few hundred feet. So, the hypothesis that the plane's shadow passed over or slightly north of the Citgo station building turns out to be plausible (though far from proven) after all.
Respectfully,
Myriad
At the time, working from the "official" flight path, I ended up concluding that the shadow would still have been too far south to be north of the Citgo, and discarded the hypothesis.
However, since that time I've learned more about the range of uncertainty of the actual path and the altitudes and rates of descent in that region. For instance, the approximately 10 degree bank at impact suggests that the plane was indeed turning slightly to the right, indicating that it came from a slightly more northerly direction in the final few hundred feet. So, the hypothesis that the plane's shadow passed over or slightly north of the Citgo station building turns out to be plausible (though far from proven) after all.
Respectfully,
Myriad
Last edited:
LashL
Goddess of Legaltainment™
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2006
- Messages
- 36,711
Obvious?!? It's more than obvious. Poppa Bush invented the CIA, or did something with the CIA. What is Dubya? He's the SON!!!! What the hell difference does it make how you spell it? You can't fool me.
Love note to CIT
Ranke (CIT), I know you guys read these threads, so here's my problem with your latest attempt to revive your DESTROYED fantasy.
http://s1.zetaboards.com/LooseChangeForums/topic/197914/2/
This image has several problem besides no numbers to prove it's aerodynamically possible...
In this image below Paik is pointing down Columbia Ave. That is parallel to the South Edge of the Navy Annex, not diagonally across it as you show.
The image below has Terry Morin's position misplotted. We can read where he said he was and you've misplotted it. In addition, he said the flight path was parallel to the Navy Annex buildings, yet you show it diagonal to the Navy Annex.
Additional problems: You're proposed a possible flight path that has the aircraft in a significant bank over Paik's position (yet, he indicates it flew straight down Columbia Pike.) It is in a significant bank abeam the Citgo yet, (NONE of your witnesses at the Citgo mention an "airshow" type bank.)
Mike Walters mentioned a bank (that you like so well) BUT, in the OPPOSITE DIRECTION. Sean Boger mentions a bank, but not a significant "airshow" type bank that you show here.
If I were you (thank God, I'm not) I'd be ashamed to display such an diagram filled with errors especially after over 2 weeks of not being able to come up with a viable flight path. Your twoofer buddies read these pages too, so I'm surprised any of them still support your obviously LOSER position.
Just as the thread on ATS advocates "It's time for CIT to go". Hang it up,
Ranke (CIT), I know you guys read these threads, so here's my problem with your latest attempt to revive your DESTROYED fantasy.
http://s1.zetaboards.com/LooseChangeForums/topic/197914/2/
This image has several problem besides no numbers to prove it's aerodynamically possible...
In this image below Paik is pointing down Columbia Ave. That is parallel to the South Edge of the Navy Annex, not diagonally across it as you show.
The image below has Terry Morin's position misplotted. We can read where he said he was and you've misplotted it. In addition, he said the flight path was parallel to the Navy Annex buildings, yet you show it diagonal to the Navy Annex.
Additional problems: You're proposed a possible flight path that has the aircraft in a significant bank over Paik's position (yet, he indicates it flew straight down Columbia Pike.) It is in a significant bank abeam the Citgo yet, (NONE of your witnesses at the Citgo mention an "airshow" type bank.)
Mike Walters mentioned a bank (that you like so well) BUT, in the OPPOSITE DIRECTION. Sean Boger mentions a bank, but not a significant "airshow" type bank that you show here.
If I were you (thank God, I'm not) I'd be ashamed to display such an diagram filled with errors especially after over 2 weeks of not being able to come up with a viable flight path. Your twoofer buddies read these pages too, so I'm surprised any of them still support your obviously LOSER position.
Just as the thread on ATS advocates "It's time for CIT to go". Hang it up,
Last edited:
It's the very first link to LCF in the post above.
Last edited: