CIT.....Time to call it a day

[jaydeehess]

"You are manipulating fools like "Munki" and "16.5" because they want to so desperately believe that the plane was not on the north side."

Transference much?

The CIT regularily twist any and all statements to make them a NoC. It matters not to them that several of those statements are then also mutually exclusive and,,,

<< drum roll>>

,,, they willfully choose to ignore that every single solitary witness who was in a position to see ir occur says, unambiguously, that the plane hit the Pentagon and that none of the Citgo witnesses, who were supposedly looking towards the Pentagon along its NoC flightpath, saw a flyover or even so much as states that they had believed that the plane hit the upper floors of the building.

That is a definition of desparatly wanting a NoC despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary!

 

[Bobert]

Waldo slimes back into the thread to make a heroic stand (after you got hit with the ban hammer, naturally)! He will cease and desist all of his efforts if you can get five of CIT's witnesses to recant. The problem is, what shall they recant, Waldo? The fact that they all said the plane hit the Pentagon? We both know that will never happen.

Or just go back to hiding beneath JFK's skirts.

"You are manipulating fools like "Munki" and "16.5" because they want to so desperately believe that the plane was not on the north side."

Hee, hee, hee! C'mon Waldo, manipulate me: just do the math, I will be convinced. I think you are not smart enough to do it, prove me wrong.

"Calculayshunz." Wow. He is like a child who is having trouble reading, so he screams out "Books are stupid!" But with Waldo, the math is too hard. So, he screams out "Calculayshunz" are stupid. Thanks, Waldo, you have confirmed that you are not smart enough to do the calculations.

/eta: nice Non Sequitur JFK!

Aldo and Craig really are as dumb as they appear!
Neither one has a degree.
Aldo admitted that they have no credentials!
Utter pathological frauds.

 

[Caustic Logic]

Well, I just discovered I am banned until 3 June apparently for giving an impertinent reply to two consecutive impertinent posts.

I must ask myself do I need that kind of crap in an attempt to alleviate ignorance? The answer is a overwhelming,,,,NO!

It is quite obvious by now that the ignorance is willful. It was a test anyway and now I know for myself.

Proof that a BS theory is bogus is a strawman argument? New definition I guess. Logical fallacy? Isn't it normal to tell someone what the fallacy is when making an accusation? Normal words have a different meaning over there.


ETA: BTW, I won't be back there anymore. Once is enough. Let their ignorance proceed as it may. It's simply not worth my time, energy, or tolerance level to put up with that kind of unmitigated crap.

Word up my brother. I was never even banned, just suspended, for calling Waldo an ahole, which he openly admits to, for 'name calling', after he'd accused me of 'being a traitor to your country' for explaining too well how utterly fraudulent CIT is. I walked away, shut it down, and am remembered there as 'deleted user.' The fantasy distraction agenda continues heedless, it's clear enough to see. I see that you see, and that's a verification. Man, the mathophobia over there...

 

[The Big Dog]

"Just waiting for Retreat and 16.5 IQ to confront these witnesses with these "calculayshunz" so they can explain to them that they didn't really see what they saw."

Mathophobia. Exactly.

Hey Waldo, why don't FIRST tell them you are publically calling them liars about the plane hitting the Pentagon? Your boy Lyte claimed that they were sent to you to lie!

At this point there is no doubt that you guys are not bright enough to do the math, now the only question is whether you guys know you are too dumb to do it (which makes you frauds) or too dumb to know that you are to dumb to do it (which makes you sad pathetic little men).

If it makes you feel better, at this point, it is pretty clear that it is the latter.

 

[The Big Dog]

Well Reheat, I reviewed your posts over at Loose Change, and there is no question that you demonstrated that CIT is grossly incompetent, and that any attempt to show that CIT is a fraud is derailed by the mods over there, JFK and Look Up. As such, CIT are cowards too.

What hypocrites they are over there: you get banned for minor infractions (at best), while Waldo's little whipping boys let him post homophobic comments, threats, profanity, and personal information.

CIT PROVED THE PLANE HIT THE PENTAGON!

 

[Reheat]

Well Reheat, I reviewed your posts over at Loose Change, and there is no question that you demonstrated that CIT is grossly incompetent, and that any attempt to show that CIT is a fraud is derailed by the mods over there, JFK and Look Up. As such, CIT are cowards too.

What hypocrites they are over there: you get banned for minor infractions (at best), while Waldo's little whipping boys let him post homophobic comments, threats, profanity, and personal information.

CIT PROVED THE PLANE HIT THE PENTAGON!

It's quite obvious by now that they (CIT and pffft) will cling to their NoC/flyover convoluted crap as long as possible regardless of how stupid and ignorant it is. As most everyone realizes, there is no other alternative to support their overall theory. If they don't have an NoC/flyover theory then all of their other crap suddenly goes away too. Their FDR analysis, their faked downed light poles, the complicit cab driver and all of the other supporting evidence generally termed as the "Official Story" has no alternative. They require an alternative and currently the only one they've devised is the NoC/flyover stuff.

I've suddenly got some spare time on my hands, so I'll probably just do a paper, post it on 911 myths and be done with it. I just don't have the tolerance to deal with the stupid anymore. It is endless as they invent new word definitions, twist witness testimony, and do whatever they deem necessary to support their deluded theory. As long as they have Administrator support at the troofer sites it's futile to discuss it there. It's a total wasted effort simply because the ignorance is intentional and further supported by more ignorance.

 

[GlennB]

...
I've suddenly got some spare time on my hands, so I'll probably just do a paper, post it on 911 myths and be done with it....

Hi Reheat,

While you're at your paper, would it be feasible to create a spreadsheet with ranges of "reasonable" numbers plugged in to represent heading, speed, turn radius (etc) and the resulting bank/G's required? For all I know this could be very tricky and serious hard work, but it could put the wind up the CIT crew who are frantically avoiding the mathematical aspect of their delusion theory.

Especially as they now have "witnesses" to an even further-NoC flightpath than the mere 'skimming over the edge of Citgo', and looking back at Lagasse's testimony it too (or rather, some of it) would have to put the plane way NoC if taken literally.

It strikes me that - despite their desperate avoidance of it - actual maths might be the only thing that will knock their absurdity on the head.

Roughly what I have in mind is --
Three different headings Noc , therefore
Three different turn radii into an approximate impact/<cough> flyover zone
Three different speeds for the above

9 outcomes. Maybe more, as I'm not totally conversant with the principles involved, and various possible impact points would alter the number of turn radii.
You da man! (he said, manipulatively)

cheers

Glenn

 

[Reheat]

It strikes me that - despite their desperate avoidance of it - actual maths might be the only thing that will knock their absurdity on the head.

Roughly what I have in mind is --
Three different headings Noc , therefore
Three different turn radii into an approximate impact/<cough> flyover zone
Three different speeds for the above

9 outcomes. Maybe more, as I'm not totally conversant with the principles involved, and various possible impact points would alter the number of turn radii.

Yes, this is precisely what I have in mind doing. The only problem with this is that the really dumb ones won't be swayed by numbers, no matter how many or how convincing. That has been evident all along. The dumb ones need to see diagrams or videos.

I'm not a graphics artist by any stretch and it's difficult to draw a curved line in GE with any degree of accuracy. I could do it easily with paper maps and planning tools, but I don't have the appropriate maps and can not easily obtain them now, due to a recent temporary disabled condition which I don't want to detail.

I can produce numbers all day, but the graphics would be very time consuming. I guess I'll start with numbers and go from there. Maybe someone with the graphics skill and knowledge will volunteer to do the graphics or perhaps I can determine a way to do a few. I'd really like to have a graphical diagram with every variable scenario, but that is a lot of work. What we really need is someone with Navigator experience and skills. Someone with WSO experience in fighters could do it exactly and quickly.

I will be next week before I can produce anything substantial, but I'll have some time after that.....

You'll see something in a week or two at the latest....

 

[The Big Dog]

I will be next week before I can produce anything substantial, but I'll have some time after that.....

You'll see something in a week or two at the latest....

That is a very generous offer, in my opinion. It would seem that the burden is very clearly on the CIT and PFFT to provide calculations to support their theory, but they are not only unwilling, they are unable.

It is remarkable that JFK seems to be taking credit for it. He'll do nothing about Waldo's bizarre comment "By the time I got around to posting, he got his sexually confused self suspended" of course, nor Waldo's equally silly claim that someone should slap me. Well, it is well established that the LC board is an intellectual wasteland.

THE PLANE HIT THE PENTAGON.

/anyone taking a screen shot of this post admits I am awesome!

 

[Reheat]

It would seem that the burden is very clearly on the CIT and PFFT to provide calculations to support their theory, but they are not only unwilling, they are unable.

It's simple, once they do they are finished. That's OK, I'll do it for them....

 

[uruk]

SPreston thinks he knows aero! This is funny. Posting aero junk to a pilot not in p4t group of pilots. Does SPreston know p4t pilots are the only group of pilots bragging they cant hit the broad side of building. (in the safety of a simulator; a simple tasks kids could do, and proven by many real pilots, and even documented on the

SPreston is insignificant. He is nothing more than sophist parrot with about as much brain power. He is not smart enough to realize how idiotic his posts are.

His posts are pretty predictable, Some overly dramatic patriotic pontification and posts the same pictures over and over again.

He's nothing more than the LCF cheerleading section. I suspect his compatriots know this already.

 

[Reheat]

It's crash and burn time!

Crips, I can't even get past the first turn without crashing and burning.

These are rough numbers and should be checked, but they are close enough.

From Paik stated position and description to Morin's stated position, then a turn to go just barely NoC (just barely North of the North canopy) here are the numbers:

Paik to Morin = 072 degrees 772' (no turn)

Morin direct to NoC = 054 degrees 1450' (turn from 072 to North canopy NoC)

We may as well start with the lowest practical speed of 300 KIAS. This turn requires a turn radius of ~1000'. To achieve this turn radius @ 300 KIAS we need ~ 83 degrees of bank, 8.2 G's. However, the problem is the stall speed increases to 457 KIAS. Do we really need any more calculashuns? BTW, the aircraft stalls at all higher speeds due to the increased G required.

From the North canopy to go to the impact point it's absurd, at about 50 degrees of turn required. Anyway want to bet less than 25 G's to pass over the sign?

ETA: Want to throw Morin under the bus, CIT?

 

[GlennB]

ETA: Want to throw Morin under the bus, CIT?

Well, their interpretation of Lagasse and the ANC car-park folks puts the flight path a good deal farther north than merely across the north of Citgo canopy. Quite a good deal, in fact.

p.s. I seem to have been denied access over there, despite having said nothing much since I was relegated to Skeptics Corner. I can log in through a proxy, but am denied access directly, presumably by IP adddress? What's this all about? Is this effectively being banned with actually getting the "banned" label ??? Weird.

 

[The Big Dog]

Reheat:

"From the North canopy to go to the impact point it's absurd, at about 50 degrees of turn required. Anyway want to bet less than 25 G's to pass over the sign?"

The frauds at CIT are now going to claim that the plane need not fly directly over the impact site. Of course, in doing so they have to throw all the guys at CITGO, Bolger, Morin, all of their Arlington witnesses, AND their fantasy Hollywood explosion "deception" under the bus, which leaves them... well, at the same place: with nothing.

 

[Reheat]

Well, their interpretation of Lagasse and the ANC car-park folks puts the flight path a good deal farther north than merely across the north of Citgo canopy. Quite a good deal, in fact.

Yes, I know. My original numbers were further North and without Morin. I have to start somewhere and the closer to the north canopy the lesser G. The more north we move it the more G. What I've plotted in the above post is the BEST POSSIBLE flight path to make NoC possible when we include Morin's position. In other words this is the best possible break I can give them. Now, let them howl, strawman, logical fallacy. I can make it worse if they want by including other witnesses.

As I've said before, do you want it more ridiculous than ridiculous? Or better expressed, more impossible than impossible?

If you think this is bad, just wait until we get to the "flyover witness"!

 

[Reheat]

Reheat:

"From the North canopy to go to the impact point it's absurd, at about 50 degrees of turn required. Anyway want to bet less than 25 G's to pass over the sign?"

The frauds at CIT are now going to claim that the plane need not fly directly over the impact site. Of course, in doing so they have to throw all the guys at CITGO, Bolger, Morin, all of their Arlington witnesses, AND their fantasy Hollywood explosion "deception" under the bus, which leaves them... well, at the same place: with nothing.

How can they claim it went anywhere except to crash into the Navy Annex? Once we fly over Morin's it's already done, done, done. There is in reality no need to go any further.

They already claim it need not fly over the impact point, but they've yet to indicate where it did go. I think they're waiting to find a point in space where aerodynamic physics don't apply. You know somewhere in a black hole around the West side of the Pentagon where there is no gravity.....

 

[The Big Dog]

"How can they claim it went anywhere except to crash into the Navy Annex?"

I know you meant the Pentagon.

To answer your question, I dunno, but if they acknowledge your post at all, they will claim that they never said the flight has to go over the impact zone. Just any old place in the vicinity of the Pentagon will be just fine for the CIT.

 

[Reheat]

"How can they claim it went anywhere except to crash into the Navy Annex?"

I know you meant the Pentagon.

No, I meant the Navy Annex when ASSUMING any NoC scenario. Of course, in reality it did crash into the Pentagon, but if had even attempted to fly from Paik to Morin and turn to NoC it would have crashed on top of the Navy Annex due to stall speed in any attempted turn to fly that kind of flight path. If we try to fly to the LaGasse described position or to the ANC described position and then turn toward the impact point, it would have crashed again attempting to make either of those turns.

From any of those position to anywhere near the impact point and then as the "flyover witness" described (according to CIT's interpretation of those witness statements) it would have crashed again due to stall speed. That's the worst turn of all.

Prior to introducing Morin as an NoC witness there was one specific path the aircraft could have flown which NONE of the witnesses described. Now, there are none.

You see Morin more closely described the generally accepted flight path, but CIT has attempted to spin his position to fit with their fantasy. All it's done has been their undoing. Now, any flight path to NoC at any practical speed is IMPOSSIBLE.

 

[1337m4n]

http://s1.zetaboards.com/LooseChange.../297723/1/#new

Is there anything in that thread worth reading? I'm trying to watch my blood pressure.

 

[uruk]

Only if you like to watch CIT twoofer scramble like ants trying to dodge and weave and redirect and change subjects and make personal attacks on credentials.

My favorite is Ranke chirping " It's not our theory, it's the witnesses theory!"

The last post is Aldo asking Reheat to prove his credentials as a pilot. It is the truthers favorite exercise to try and get personal information from posters. I guess they see it as something to threaten the opposition with. Something like "Your in trouble now! I know who you are!"

Yea, so what.