Flight 77 FDR Data created before black boxes were recovered

[pomeroo]

Yeah, the NTSB often have the clocks on their computers wrong.

If in doubt, claim a truther tampered with it.

Gee, Paul, you're sounding pretty desperate these days. Oh, come to think of it, you always sounded desperate.

 

[defaultdotxbe]

How exactly does that explain the file being created before the box was pulled from the pentagon?

your evidence that it was is very flimsy, several methods, both intentional and unintentional, that could have resulted in the modified date being changed have been suggested

what happens when you apply ockhams razor?

 

[pomeroo]

You assume right. I don't believe Silverstein admitted anything.

Hmmmm, a correct statement. This means that either you are not P-doh or you are being as sly as when you pretended to abandon the fantasy movement.

 

[theauthor]

Hmmmm, a correct statement. This means that either you are not P-doh or you are being as sly as when you pretended to abandon the fantasy movement.

This is one strange forum.

Say, Ron, who you got lined up for hardfire next?

 

[deep]

Maybe I'm being overly simplistic here, but if you add five hours to the time to correct for the difference between GMT and EST, doesn't that resolve the discrepancy quite nicely?

Nice try, but it wasn't EST, it was EDT (i.e., we were in daylight savings time). That means the GMT offset was -4, instead of -5.

Plus, that would imply that time reported by USA Today was GMT, which makes absolutely no sense given the fact that the report came out of Washington and they didn't specify a time zone.

 

[deep]

I don't believe the article did a very good job of articulating the specifics of this discovery.

I'm fairly certain that this file was burned on a CD and sent through the mail in response to the FOIA request (you'll notice in the screenshot that the file is located on a "Disc"). The file association (e.g., Excel, as it would appear to be in this case) is not stored in the file itself - it's an end-user preference. He probably tried to open it in Excel, thinking it was CSV, and Windows stored the preference.

Hopefully a follow-up article will be posted with a better explanation. Assuming I am correct, this is a very curious discovery, especially when you consider the US Government's strict IT policies when it comes to time synchronization (i.e., their almost-religious use of NTP).

 

[DGM]

I don't believe the article did a very good job of articulating the specifics of this discovery.

I'm fairly certain that this file was burned on a CD and sent through the mail in response to the FOIA request (you'll notice in the screenshot that the file is located on a "Disc"). The file association (e.g., Excel, as it would appear to be in this case) is not stored in the file itself - it's an end-user preference. He probably tried to open it in Excel, thinking it was CSV, and Windows stored the preference.

Hopefully a follow-up article will be posted with a better explanation. Assuming I am correct, this is a very curious discovery, especially when you consider the US Government's strict IT policies when it comes to time synchronization (i.e., their almost-religious use of NTP).

How do you know the file date hasn't been changed? Why does this automatically mean a cover up by the USG and not a hoax by a "truther".

 

[BenBurch]

I don't.

looks like the file comes in a .fdr format



http://www.aal77.com/

Liar. MS Windows does not know that file type.

 

[theauthor]

Liar. MS Windows does not know that file type.

What have I lied about?

 

[twinstead]

Again. Because of the lack of control, ANY court in the world would ignore the OP. I wonder why that is...

 

[deep]

Liar. MS Windows does not know that file type.

I couldn't help but laugh after reading this, because I believe it represents the attitude of most of the JREF debunkers I've interacted with over the past year:

From a position of obvious ignorance, you're claiming that someone else is a liar.

File associations in Microsoft Windows are not static in nature - if you attempt to open an unknown file type with a certain application, it will give you the option of "always" opening that type of file with the same application (creating a persistent file association). I haven't been a regular Windows user for about eight years now, but if I recall correctly, that option was enabled as the default behavior.

Sorry, but nobody is lying. (insert spiteful comment here)

 

[defaultdotxbe]

just to clear some things up

windows is saying "FDR File" as the type not because it recognizes the file type, but because it doesnt, its simply reporting the extension, which is .fdr

the file has an excel icon because the user chose to open it in excel and checked "always use this program to open this type of file" youll notice the icon is not the normal excel icon, but a blank page with the excel icon on it, this is how windows denotes a user-set file association

there is no extension shown in the image because the user has the "hide extensions for known file types" setting enabled, and since he told windows to always open a .fdr file with excel windows now considers it a known file type

as someone else mentioned you can do the same thing by creating a text file (.txt) and renaming it .woo

 

[twinstead]

Sorry, but nobody is lying. (insert spiteful comment here)

Correct. But some people are arguing an untenable position who know it is untenable.

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Liar. MS Windows does not know that file type.

Please, don't continue this line of argument. It's pointless. File extensions don't matter. They can be anything anyone wants them to be. I can rename that file American_77.doc or American_77.topsecretnwoplans... whatever. It doesn't matter.

The file extension says nothing about the authenticity of the file itself.

--

Following theauthor's link, it looks like the FDR data was extracted by a program called Read Out System Equipment (ROSE) Recorder Interface Software (PDF).

From the screenshot alone you can tell this is an old piece of software. You can also make out the date in the status bar: 12/20/00. I'm assuming this is the "current" date and time, but I may be wrong. This is pre-Windows XP.

In fact, Windows XP wasn't released until October 25, 2001... over a month after 9/11. That means this software was running on a Windows operating system without automatic time synchronization. Clock drift was still an issue.

 

[theauthor]

I couldn't help but laugh after reading this, because I believe it represents the attitude of most of the JREF debunkers I've interacted with over the past year:

From a position of obvious ignorance, you're claiming that someone else is a liar.

File associations in Microsoft Windows are not static in nature - if you attempt to open an unknown file type with a certain application, it will give you the option of "always" opening that type of file with the same application (creating a persistent file association). I haven't been a regular Windows user for about eight years now, but if I recall correctly, that option was enabled as the default behavior.

Sorry, but nobody is lying. (insert spiteful comment here)

There are many situations on Jref that you will be called a liar:

1. If you make a mistake

2. If you quote someone who once made a mistake

3. If you offer a subjective opinion

4. If the jrefer misunderstands you

5. If you prove the jrefer wrong

 

[theauthor]

If Benburch doesn't retract his statement that I am a liar and offer an apology, he will be put on ignore. I only have a couple of people on ignore and that was for exactly the same reason.

 

[ktesibios]

Just for the sheer heck of it, I tried a little experiment:

I started with a circuit sim file I created a few years ago, which is stored on the other computer in the shop here, right-clicking it and selecting "properties". This showed the creation date as 9/11/2005, 1;42:29 PM and the modification date as 9/16/2005, 12:12:52 PM. (that's about right; the lasst time I did any work with that circuit was quite a while ago.)

Then I uploaded that file to our ftp server. Checking the creation and mod dates for that file on that computer I got "today" for both.

Then I downloaded that copy back to the same computer it came from originally. Checking "properties" on that file showed today as the creation and modification dates. That's as it should be, since today is when that particular file was first created on that particular disk volume.

So once again, there are a lot of ways that a file's creation and/or modification dates can be changed inadvertently in the course of normal usage- copying it to a removable medium, copying it from a removable medium to another computer, copying it to another computer via a network...

And, if someone wanted to alter these dates deliberately all that's required is changing a few bytes in the file's directory entry. Programs like PCTools and the old DOS version of Norton Disk Editor had this capability; someone with the requisite knowledge and a debugger program could do it by hand.

The only conclusion that can be drawn from these date entries actually derives from the twoofer response to them:

If the International Olympic Committee ever adds conclusion-jumping to the Games, it's nice to know that the USA will be able to field a really strong team.

 

[defaultdotxbe]

In fact, Windows XP wasn't released until October 25, 2001... over a month after 9/11. That means this software was running on a Windows operating system without automatic time synchronization. Clock drift was still an issue.

thats not entirely true, windows 2000 used kerberos for network authentication, so a windows 2000 domain would require clock synchronization with the domain controller, however its entirely possible that NTSB was not using a 2000 domain, or anything that required kerberos authentication

although even under kerberos domains its possible to have incorrect timestamps, i had an issue at my office where someone was always 5 hours off, turns out as a personal "escape" they had set their PC to hawaiis timezone and had it displaying the weather in honolulu, lol

There are many situations on Jref that you will be called a liar:

1. If you make a mistake

2. If you quote someone who once made a mistake

3. If you offer a subjective opinion

4. If the jrefer misunderstands you

5. If you prove the jrefer wrong

these will typically result in a truther calling you a liar as well

 

[twinstead]

If Benburch doesn't retract his statement that I am a liar and offer an apology, he will be put on ignore. I only have a couple of people on ignore and that was for exactly the same reason.

Spouting nonsense based on half-assed interpretations of what one sees and reads isn't lying. In that respect he does owe you an apology.

 

[beachnut]

If Benburch doesn't retract his statement that I am a liar and offer an apology, he will be put on ignore. I only have a couple of people on ignore and that was for exactly the same reason.

If you believe in 9/11 truth ideas, which you are trying to support now, you have ignored logic, rational thought, evidence and facts; putting people on ignore is what you do with evidence too. What is new as you bring up more failed ideas as 9/11 truth goes into it's 7th year of no evidence, just talk.