CIT Fraud Revealed

[Wolrab]

What a colossal waste of time. These idiots do not deserve any response other than pictures of the dead strapped to their seats. They start off with a completely false premise, and argue "what ifs" that are impossible. Their entire house of cards is based on the memories of a two or three second episode years ago (and CIT's insane interpretations of said memories). They don't even have the balls to do any research or call the people that picked up the roasted flesh and twisted wreckage. Their fly-over is always conveniently ignored as they can't produce anything to back it up.
If any lurkers out there are at all swayed by any of these fools, they were lost to begin with.

 

[beachnut]

Teh light poles were knocked down by the blow back from the wall breaching charges used to make the small round hole in the Pentagon.\cit mode

It sucked them toward the explosion. More silent sucking explosives.

CIT has not limit to the stupid ideas they can make up and Balsamo is so dumb he can't from a theory.

 

[BCR]

Your "band of errors" has just been narrowed down to one path.
There can be no ambiguity.

Ironic that it was ME who had to pinpoint THE proposed SOC path huh?

Mudlark, you have no idea what you just posted do you? Take the Warren decode and plot it at take-off at Dulles, then come back and we'll talk INS drift and measurement system error.

Oh never mind, I've already done it for you.

Since there can ONLY be one 'official path' according to Warren's decode, reckon the plane took off from a parking lot instead of the runway.

 

[beachnut]

...
Since there can ONLY be one 'official path' according to Warren's decode, reckon the plane took off from a parking lot instead of the runway.

He has no idea why the systems can be off 2000 feet but pilots can bring the plane in to inches on the runway center line save the p4t who can't hit the Pentagon in the safety of a simulator. He hooked up with pilot worse than terrorist who 75 percent of the time can hit targets as big as runways.

mudlark has not looked at the FDR heading system to see what the real headings were or calculated the real course.

The FDR has no NoC flight path because those paths are all impossible and he has dropped them like they drop witnesses who watched 77 impact the Pentagon.

mudlark is only here to post links to CIT to get more soda money for Craig from increased traffic.

mudlark owes us the NoC flight path headings and points to pin down the NoC with math. They did a cartoon implying 77 was on the NoC but can't knock down the lampposts which also debunks any NoC because they can't fly over the damage. Dolts making cartoons; they also made an instantaneous reversal from 89 degree right bank to 89 degree left bank.

 

[Brainache]

Are we done here? I would say yes. CIT's fraud has indeed been revealed over and over again in this thread (amongst others). The CIT cheer squad, such as it is, has only managed to add more info to the SOC flight path and continues to ignore all of the witnesses who saw the plane hit the Pentagon.
Anybody with any sense at all can see this, but somehow I still think Mr Mudlark will continue to push his delusions here. Why? It can't be for money.

Why do you do it Mudlark? You know you are wrong, we know you are wrong, all the lurkers know you are wrong, my 12 year old daughter knows you are wrong and yet you persist. WHY?

 

[bje]

Anybody with any sense at all can see this, but somehow I still think Mr Mudlark will continue to push his delusions here. Why? It can't be for money.

Why do you do it Mudlark? You know you are wrong, we know you are wrong, all the lurkers know you are wrong, my 12 year old daughter knows you are wrong and yet you persist. WHY?

Because we all keep responding...

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Flight 93 crashed into the Pentagon.

Shhh! They don't know that!

 

[BCR]

mudlark is only here to post links to CIT to get more soda money for Craig from increased traffic.

Has anyone here really followed a link posted by mudlark? I give folks credit for having more brain power than that on this forum. Speaking of which, here is some advice for mudlark and his P4T pals.

 

[JimBenArm]

Has anyone here really followed a link posted by mudlark? I give folks credit for having more brain power than that on this forum. Speaking of which, here is some advice for mudlark and his P4T pals.

[qimg]http://zoesflight.com/files/DrinkDerive_Fullpic_1.gif[/qimg]

Do you actually think they'll get it?

 

[mudlark]

The sun angle kills CIT flight path as does physics.

Mudlark shows up and can't do the math for a single CIT flight path; wait they have no rational flight path.

Paik is still pointing south as are most CIT witnesses.

All CIT witnesses agree Flight 77 impacted the Pentagon.

Thus: CIT is a fraud.

Beachnut, please tell me what the official SOC path is.
Farmer claims that there is a "margin of error". Do you agree given Warren Stutt´s data that I have posted and the directional damage.
Please, no rants, it should be a simple answer because you claim that there is only ONE SOC path compared to the NOC witnesses´ variable paths.
OR are there more than one possible SOC paths?
Take into account the post I made.

The rest of your post has repeatedly been debunked in whole or in part by me in previous posts. Please stay on topic with the specific questions I have just raised.

The math on the shadow has just been posted for you. What do YOU find wrong with it?

 

[mudlark]

Ah the fun of using the most unreliable form of evidence to dismiss the most reliable form of evidence. And yet CIT seems oblivious as to why they aren't taken seriously. Not even within the truther movement.

I have just given physical proof debunking BCR´s claim and AWSmith´s image and math regarding the possibility of the shadow of the plane reaching Paik´s shop.
Are you actually reading this thread or...?

Aah..just noticed your name.

The "most reliable form of evidence", according to BCR (and the rest given their ambiguity or non comments on the matter) does NOT show THE proposed SOC path. It is varied because of a "margin of error", according to him.

The directional damage, specifically the lightpole damage, narrows this path down to one specific path. That any variation to this path is possible is also refuted by Warren Stutt´s data regarding a mere 0.3º change in course for the entire duration of the final seconds and NO left wing manouevre at all.
It in effect shows a straight line

There is NO "margin of error" given this physical evidence. OR is Warren´s data wrong/mistaken?

 

[mudlark]

I drew no path. I drew the length of a shadow from an object at a 210 foot altitude STARTING FROM Paiks shop. Where the shadow ended is where the shadow ended. I did not say it was the tip of the right wing. I did not say it was the tip of the left wing. There is a 124 feet 10 inch range that the total wing span could theoretically fall into, ASSUMING the 210 foot altitude is accurate to begin with.

And there you go with your push pins again, Are you that stupid? Did you not read where I asked you TWICE if the locations of your pins was verified with GPS on site? Did you not remember the problems with accuracy Google Earth has with overlays?

So, you believe that the SOC path is more along the lines of Warren´s plotted path? That point is along his path.If you believe this ONE piece of the Paik brothers´ testimony and totally ignore the rest, you are also forced to maintain that the plane had to have been on this path.

Remember Warren´s data does not mention ANY left bank or roll necessary to line up with the damage.


The point you drew to is NOT on the directional damage SOC path.
I have shown you the math and the image of the shadow in relation to the TRUE proposed SOC path.The shadow could not physically reach Paik´s shop.

Are you actually trying to add another 124 feet into the equation to muddy the waters Smith?
The image is measured from the fuselage of the plane. Even with the left wing, and the left wing´s length only added on, it STILL doesn´t reach.

Those "stupid push pins were plotted by Warren himself.
Did YOU not read where I have repeatedly said this?

They were also plotted using GE lat/long..

 

[mudlark]

This one is for Beachnut:

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=19610

Are you SURE you want to carry this argument regarding Madelyn Zakhem?

 

[mudlark]

Now I expect Craig to be that dumb!

How does CIT get their loyal terrorists apologist cult members to post at a skeptics forum?

Don't tell him there are errors on google earth, then he might understand the "error band" and have to learn math.

Who said the shadow was over the shop? Why can't the shadow next to the shop? Plus the left wing is higher than the right wing, so you can add to the height. Bank angle.

Notice how CIT and their proxy poster have to avoid presenting math for their 80 degree banked impossible, and delusional NoC flight paths.

They threw the impossible flight paths under the bus with Boger, and Madelyn.

Read my post to Smith. Another JREFer dissing Warren? Wow.

Why can´t it be NEXT to the shop? How the hell could Shinki have seen it as he states in Larson´s interview when he was in the BACK?? Where he could not see the ground? Weak effort Beachnut.

Anser the post I made to you.

Where is the SOC path given the points I made?

 

[The Big Dog]

c-c-c-c-c-combo breaker!

Hi Craig!

 

[mudlark]

OOPS!

You did it again, you just MOVED the flight path FURTHER south! LOL

The FDR has the bank angle, from the p4t decode at this time is 6 degree right bank.
You just said 77 tilted left to avoid the VDOT tower, this is great!

Yes a civilian would say tilted left you non-pilot CIT cult member! Silly, a pilot would look up at a plane coming his way and say right bank for this.
[qimg]http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll116/tjkb/1MadelynSeePlaneTiltLeft.jpg[/qimg]
Madelyn looks up and see 77 she knows the VDOT tower is near her and she say left tilt.

This is a right bank, the FDR confirms a right bank, Madelyn says left tilt to avoid the VDOT tower from this point of view make 77 on the correct impact flight path.

Looks like left tilt is a good answer, I can tell the civilian it is a right bank for a pilot. But sure looks like a left tilt to avoid the VDOT tower. New path time!

Thank You. So the SOC path IS in fact the "consolidated path" that Farmer has promoted?

According to you it may even be FURTHER South given that the plane had to avoid the tower.

Or did it hit the tower? BCR? BCR??

 

[mudlark]

Did you get to the GPS overlay verification yet? With all your frenetically desperate "wall of posts" picture postings I seem to have missed the post that you addressed GPS accuracy in. Care to link to it?

Oops again Smith. You´ll have to ask Warren about that.

 

[mudlark]

What kind of insanity is mudlark posting now? Mudlark, that is not the scene file. We need the scene file. If you can't produce the scene file for verification then you are not saying anything worth paying attention to. More cartoons won't get it.

Hahaha. Pathetic.

The data used for the path is the NTSB Heading/Course and Altitude data.

The data for the Sun is from the US Naval Observatory.

The data for Topography is from USGS DEM.

Stop asking for the "data". The data is all there. Use whatever program you want.

So when you and Hokulele were asking for "data", you really want the "scene files"???
Thank you for proving my point about wanting it set up for you!

Scene files are not "data". The only reason you want the scene files is because you cant build your own like the author has with the actual data. Furthermore, how can you expect him to give you his scene files that he spent countless hours putting together to people who constantly personally attack and libel him??? You must be delusional.

I have posted screenshots of the scale for those who wish to check the construction. If they want to build their own using the same data that was used, for comparison, you KNOW where to get the data.

I have corrected the EST vs EDT, flight path.. .etc. Now you want the actual construction given to you on a platter because you cant build your own with the data provided?


Whats next, are you going to want me to give you the PC and laptop which built the scene as well?

Stop making hairbrain excuses. Put up or shut up..both of you.
It´s transparent and it´s getting very tedious.

Why not grow a pair of gonads and go ask Rob yourself?

 

[BCR]

Mudlark, come back when you have something beyond cartoons and we'll talk.

 

[Hokulele]

Oops again Smith. You´ll have to ask Warren about that.

Does this mean you do not know the accuracy of Google Earth?