bobloblaw said:
Not sure where you're going with that, I've always been pretty sure there were 5.
Well, as I've said, it is mostly to mess with their brains. In particular TC's, as I find it funny how he throws around words like noob or newb, yet he himself doesn't appear to have much of a clue about the 9/11 Pentagon scene.
If you look at it from a certain point of view, the pole#2 pic, that CIT like to use, doesn't actually show the whole lamp pole, just the top section, which holds the light assembly itself. This part:
There's also Mr. England's account, saying he was doing about 50mph when the pole hit his car. If the pole, that hit the car, was "Pole#1", he wouldn't stop immediately, inertia would carry him quite a way beyond pole#1's position. So, I'm saying that there is a possibility that Mr. England's car got hit by p#2, and the p#1 was somehow not there on 9/11. Here's the messing-with-CIT-brain part: how would the lack of p#1 change their interpretation of the "official" flight path?
TC said:
me said:
1) Was Mr. Boger even able to see to the North of Citgo, TC? yes or no
2) Was there a tree in his way, TC? yes or no
3) Was there a tree in Mr. Wallace's and Mr. Skipper's way, TC? yes or no
4) Was Mr. Stephens even in a position to make such a distinction, TC? yes or no
1) Yes
2) No
3) We're not discussing their accounts, I would have to review them.
4) Yes
TC, thanks for answering a part of my post.
How do you comment this tree on the right, then?
http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/photodata/original/4497.jpg
And you are aware that there was a whole highway overpass in the way of Mr. Stephens' "view" of Citgo, right?
Yes, you should look into Mr. Wallace and Mr. Skipper's accounts. I don't quite remember which NEIT they are at the moment, but I'm sure you can find at least Mr. Wallace. Why would they be running, if the plane only turned towards them behind the tree? (Remember, Lyte says Mr. Walter was unable to see the impact, because some other trees were in the way.) If they only saw it as it supposedly passed across the Navy Annex, they would surely think it was going to fly over the cemetery, thus nowhere near them. Why would they decide to run in the same direction the plane was supposedly heading, without even being able to see it turn towards them behind the tree?
Of course, I'd still like to know just how do you detect the difference between a false and real memory.
bobloblaw said:
Could someone who can handle being stupified for a few hours please have a look through this thread (...) and tell me where I've gone wrong please?
CIT has occasionaly been wrong about the poles on the eastern side of Washington Boulevard for a while. But since this has only happened with certain photos, I had never bothered to have a closer look. I haven't noticed the #1 problem yet, and I'm not going back there to check it out now. It's not worth the headache or damage to my walls at forehead height, sorry. Lyte's interpretation of Sucherman's 2 o'clock position has been addressed by Larson. In no way would I be surprised, if Lyte has mixed up another light pole, though. There is one quite near the VDOT camera pole and I can imagine how he could mistake it for pole#1.
You can crosscheck the light post positions in Microsoft's Live Earth.
http://maps.live.com
When you navigate around the area in "Bird's eye" view, you sometimes get aerial photos from before the new roads were built, and at other times the more recent situation. Here's a sample of the old setup.
Here's a more recent one, with an approximate location of pole #5. #3 & #4 are still pretty much where they used to be.
