CIT Fraud Revealed

[W.D.Clinger]

What the hell does this "falling out" have to do with their math??

Their falling out had to do with Balsamo's lack of integrity.

If you can't figure out what Balsamo's lack of integrity has to do with his 11.2g/10.14g/2223g/58g calculations and other pseudo-mathematical failures, then there's no hope for you, mudlark.

But we knew that already.

These "qualified people" have yet to debunk the points I made or the image/video I posted regarding the straight line portrayed in the data.
WARREN´S data no less.
The directional damage requires LESS mathematical expertise.

Your conclusions appear to be based on a cartoon and your misinterpretation of FDR data. As a variety of qualified people have pointed out, you have refused to post the numerical basis for your Maya cartoon, so there is literally nothing for them to debunk.

It took you two days to figure out that the FDR headings were sampled at 0.5 Hz, even after several qualified people had pointed that out to you. That's Balsamo-class incompetence, mudlark.

All I have asked is for you guys to tell me EXACTLY where the SOC path IS given the available electronic data and physical damage given the alleged speed.

Stop blowing smoke.

You're spewing it, mudlark. Throughout this entire thread, you have repeatedly declined to identify which of CIT's eight or nine yellow lines corresponds to your theory. For you to quibble now over half a degree or a few dozen feet is laughing-dog hypocrisy.

Laughing-dog hypocrisy rocks!

 

[beachnut]

CIT? Beech, you sure about that? Don't you mean

Yes, and Balsamo is pouting/putting out videos of the south path with bank angles of 80 degree with instant roll rate reversals.

Do cartoons do 2,223 gs? Balsamo and CIT do live in a cartoon world of fantasy and paranoid conspiracy theories.

 

[mudlark]

This cool, you post more proof of you lack of math, and flying skills. You should listen to BCR, I think he has a degree with lots of math. The 22=11 for you is too deep; you need to go back to school.



61.3 true course less than 5 seconds to impact
61.1 true course less than 4 seconds to impact
61.6 true course less than 3 seconds to impact
61.6 true course less than 2 seconds to impact
62.4 true course less than 1 second to impact

You call this a straight line due to your lack of math. It will take you a few days to figure out where I got the numbers let alone figure out the definition of straight line.

The FDR also shows impact with the generator. Darn, Warren's decode he did from scratch beats the stolen software decode of failed pilot who make up lies and are like Tim McVeigh, dumber than a box of rocks.

Warren decoded the FDR to the end of data. p4t decode the FDR and left out 5 seconds so they could say 77 was too high. They are a fraud and lie to make up lies.

You are at best a poor terrorist apologist with SPAM from CIT.

What is the accuracy of the heading system?
What is the accuracy of the navigation system?
You really do deny there are errors, except in your moronic delusions.

You don't know what a straight line is; add that to your list.

His CANNED SPAM ran out!

Wowww...how many dodges so far??

Directional damage + Warren´s decode (which you support) = straight line

There ya go.

You have offerd no alternative possibilities

You all claim that there is no specific NOC path, nor data available, so any math presented should be ignored yet the SOC path seems to be a mystery too.
I´ve just narrowed it down for you guys and no amount of smoke, insults or math can logically debunk it. Or at least you haven´t tried.

Why not ask Warren himself how he sees it?

 

[beachnut]

...
Where is the left bank/roll mentioned in Warren´s decode? ...

Not sure if it is still posted, but you posted the left bank. Funny as heck as you can't look, or do math before you leap back into the pit of ignorance with CIT and Balsamo.

I see a left bank.

Are you pilot? You know you can turn left in a right bank?

But please show me the straight line data you have!? Hurry, your can of SPAM is empty.


We have the data for the south flight path and CIT witnesses pointing to it CIT is so dumb they can't figure it out, and you call 22 seconds 11 seconds, and can't define straight to save your delusions.

Please post the data for the NoC. You can't. You have the data for the south flight path, and Balsamo's experts with stolen software failed to decode it. Now Warren takes the NTSB data, the complete data and decodes it to the end, showing impact with the Generator, after 77 passes within 4 feet on the RADALT of the overpass where lamppost were knocked down the direction which 77 flew.

! oops, reality steps in, and vaporizes your delusions, if only you had math.

But go ahead show me a straight line...

 

[mudlark]

Their falling out had to do with Balsamo's lack of integrity.

What, as opposed to yours?
I´ve been accused of being in a cult but you are in your own little gang regarding your obsession with his work. Mainly libellous insults and childish rattle-throwing.

If you can't figure out what Balsamo's lack of integrity has to do with his 11.2g/10.14g/2223g/58g calculations and other pseudo-mathematical failures, then there's no hope for you, mudlark.

But we knew that already.

As opposed to the upstanding citizens here Will?
Lie after lie. Disinfo and insults the par for debate.
Like Rob, I ADMIT my mistakes publically. A quality severely lacking in these pages.
NOBODY questions anything posted here. Even when these lies are repeatedly posted and debunked by me.

Your conclusions appear to be based on a cartoon and your misinterpretation of FDR data. As a variety of qualified people have pointed out, you have refused to post the numerical basis for your Maya cartoon, so there is literally nothing for them to debunk.

It took you two days to figure out that the FDR headings were sampled at 0.5 Hz, even after several qualified people had pointed that out to you. That's Balsamo-class incompetence, mudlark.


You're spewing it, mudlark. Throughout this entire thread, you have repeatedly declined to identify which of CIT's eight or nine yellow lines corresponds to your theory. For you to quibble now over half a degree or a few dozen feet is laughing-dog hypocrisy.

Laughing-dog hypocrisy rocks!

WHERE is this SOC path? At LEAST the NOC witnesses provided "yellow lines"
Nobody here has shown me where they believe the SOC path actually IS.
It changes daily.
What I have just presented may be simplified as a lot of lurkers reading this are laymen themselves on the subject but the SOC STRAIGHT path which runs south of the VDOT antenna according to 22 seconds of data and as required for the physical damage.

Plot the path YOU believe SOC lies on given what I have just said about Warren´s data and the fraction of a degree change in course from before the Navy Annex to Route 27.

 

[BCR]

Ya'lls math is all wong cause, cause my buddy Robbie drew a cartoon that don't look like those squiggly little numbers.

Give me a freaking break, have we reverted to kindergarten in this thread?

 

[mudlark]

Look..

http://i46.tinypic.com/mv6k4o.jpg

and this (AWSMITH image)

http://i294.photobucket.com/albums/mm89/AWSmith1955/127azimuth.jpg

Which math is correct? Which path is correct based on the data? Why is Hokele able to figure out the math from AW Smith and Farmer, but not from P4T when using the same exact method? Why does AW Smith ignore FDR data and the path which is required for the physical damage?

http://i49.tinypic.com/2s8rd55.jpg

Why does AW Smith and Farmer start their theory with a conclusion? (starting at Paik's shop instead of from the data and path required for the physical damage.)

Why do you people want scene files from a program you all claim is only good for a "cartoon" when you already have the data to plug into any program you want?

I think the lurkers will know the answer to these questions.

Now bring on the "gang-rape debate style" guys!

 

[mudlark]

Ya'lls math is all wong cause, cause my buddy Robbie drew a cartoon that don't look like those squiggly little numbers.

Give me a freaking break, have we reverted to kindergarten in this thread?

Participate BCR instead of hiding behind Beachnut and his non-answers to my posts.

It´s YOUR claims that are on topic here.

Precisely WHERE am I wrong in what I have stated so far?

 

[mudlark]

By the way, I thought you weren´t playing any more after the VDOT tower "scoop" ?

 

[BCR]

Participate BCR instead of hiding behind Beachnut and his non-answers to my posts.

It´s YOUR claims that are on topic here.

Precisely WHERE am I wrong in what I have stated so far?

It ain't worth my time pointing all of your errors out mudlark. Come back with your source data and we'll talk.

 

[beachnut]

NOC witnesses provided "yellow lines"


... the SOC path actually IS.

All the yellow paths are impossible; do you do math or not! NOT

The real flight path is defined by the FDR and it knocks down lampposts and impacts the Pentagon where the FDR came to rest inside the Pentagon.

Please give, with as much detail, the hard evidence for NoC, you have the real flight path in the FDR, you don't have anything for an NoC but the insane rant of Balsamo who OFFERS NO THEORIES, and the morons at CIT who can't do more than drugs.

Give us the headings for your NoC. You have the headings for the real flight path, try doing the hard work of presenting a reality based NoC.

Speeds, bank angle and more.

You say 77 flew perpendicular to the Pentagon over the fireball; show us the flight path.

You can't.

 

[BCR]

By the way, I thought you weren´t playing any more after the VDOT tower "scoop" ?

Make up your mind, do you want me to answer you or not? I've been waiting on your source data. Why should I respond to anything (other than for the humor) if you are not going to back up your claims?

 

[beachnut]

It ain't worth my time pointing all of your errors out mudlark. Come back with your source data and we'll talk.

You proved CIT is a fraud in the OP! Now mudlark makes a weak personal attack. The best he can do. If he had math, he could see he supports idiots.

They are too lazy to do the work, and post the data.

He has not idea what straight means; Math

He can't tell me the accuracy of the heading system. He has a straight line fetish. And he can't define the NoC except for flight paths drawn by people tangential to the flight path. All the drawn flight paths are impossible.

 

[The Big Dog]

All I have asked is for you guys to tell me EXACTLY where the SOC path IS given the available electronic data and physical damage given the alleged speed.

Stop blowing smoke.

Wow! I have stopped following this thread, other than to heckle the CIT's newest bestest buddy once in a while.

But this little piece of hilarity caught my eye! This from the same group of Truthers who repeatedly post thier little photo with about 12 different yellow NoC paths? Hee hee!

Anyway, did mudlark post the link to the raw video yet?

No?

Oh. Hey Mudlark, I got one word for Aldo: Spanx, he'll thank me.

 

[mudlark]

Not sure if it is still posted, but you posted the left bank. Funny as heck as you can't look, or do math before you leap back into the pit of ignorance with CIT and Balsamo.

[qimg]http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll116/tjkb/1CITFRAUDROLL.jpg[/qimg] I see a left bank.

Are you pilot? You know you can turn left in a right bank?

But please show me the straight line data you have!? Hurry, your can of SPAM is empty.


We have the data for the south flight path and CIT witnesses pointing to it CIT is so dumb they can't figure it out, and you call 22 seconds 11 seconds, and can't define straight to save your delusions.

Please post the data for the NoC. You can't. You have the data for the south flight path, and Balsamo's experts with stolen software failed to decode it. Now Warren takes the NTSB data, the complete data and decodes it to the end, showing impact with the Generator, after 77 passes within 4 feet on the RADALT of the overpass where lamppost were knocked down the direction which 77 flew.

! oops, reality steps in, and vaporizes your delusions, if only you had math.

But go ahead show me a straight line...

That ¨left BANK¨ is all of 0.7º recorded at datapoint 151361 on the following image of Warren´s

http://es.tinypic.com/r/14mz0jd/6

The rest are all right roll. So where is the left bank manouevre necessary recorded in this data IF the plane had been "slightly North of SOC". Where?

 

[mudlark]

Make up your mind, do you want me to answer you or not? I've been waiting on your source data. Why should I respond to anything (other than for the humor) if you are not going to back up your claims?

What the hell are you talking about BCR??

Check the posts I made to Beachnut.
They contain all the data.
Warren´s data. Directional damage. NO "margin of error" based on this data. Unless one of them is wrong?

 

[mudlark]

You proved CIT is a fraud in the OP! Now mudlark makes a weak personal attack. The best he can do. If he had math, he could see he supports idiots.

They are too lazy to do the work, and post the data.

He has not idea what straight means; Math

He can't tell me the accuracy of the heading system. He has a straight line fetish. And he can't define the NoC except for flight paths drawn by people tangential to the flight path. All the drawn flight paths are impossible.

That´s complete bull and you know it Beachnut.
Is Warren´s data on the right roll wrong?
The directional damage and speed allegedly reached by the plane speaks for itself.
Am I wrong? Explain.

 

[beachnut]

That ¨left BANK¨ is all of 0.7º recorded at datapoint 151361 on the following image of Warren´s

http://es.tinypic.com/r/14mz0jd/6

The rest are all right roll. So where is the left bank manouevre necessary recorded in this data IF the plane had been "slightly North of SOC". Where?

You said...

Where is the left bank/roll mentioned in Warren´s decode? ...

I showed you.

Where is your NoC flight path? Please show us your data. The FDR shows the real flight path, you have a moronic can't show us a flight path, of no flight path because they are all impossible to fly NoC from over Paiks office where you have the Plane too low so the shadow is not on his office in real life as the plane is too high to cast a shadow your MORON CIT fake flight path.

Place 77 on a flight path now, or retract your lies of a NoC!

You are a fraud too.

Post the straight flight path from the FDR? Do you understand straight? No.

How did you place you pins? How did you get the Positions? Where in the FDR is the position and what is the accuracy? FRAUD

Provide the source for the postions or you are a Fraud like CIT is and proved in the OP.

How does 77 do the NoC at 6 degrees of bank in the last 5 seconds where bank averages 3.9 degrees? Full throttle speed was 470 knots acceleration to impact at over 483 KIAS. So Balsamo's nut case 250 knots is a big moronic lie, like his 2,223 gs of moronic math.



You presented these numbers from the FDR at .5 Hz.
61.2
61.5
61.5
61.5
61.5
61.5
61.2
61.2
61.2
61.5
61.5

But the real numbers for true course for the last 5 seconds.
I have 61.3, you have nothing!
I have 61.1, you have 61.5, which one is right?
61.6 - you have nothing! Why?
I have 61.6, you have 61.5, and I have 61. 6, take math, so forget figuring it out.
62.4 - you have nothing the last second, trying to make the path look straight and tell lies?

You present data and hide the facts you are using samples of Track Angle True at .5 Hz, not all the data. Fact is infinite data is missing.

Why are my numbers better or worse than yours. I show a course that varies 1.3 degrees, you show .3 degrees! Is your lack of math skills and dishonesty keeping you from posting the truth?

 

[BCR]

What the hell are you talking about BCR??

Check the posts I made to Beachnut.
They contain all the data.
Warren´s data. Directional damage. NO "margin of error" based on this data. Unless one of them is wrong?

Like the 0.5 Hertz misrepresentation? Your source data includes the unedited interviews and Maya source files. The rest you are just butchering perfectly good data.

The OP is the misrepresentation of Paik's account by CIT. You have done everything but address the OP. So come see me when you decide to come off the source data Craig/Aldo/Rob, or whoever you are.

 

[W.D.Clinger]

What, as opposed to yours?

Rob Balsamo, after admitting to his dishonest R_Mackey sock puppetry, misidentifies a participant at a forum I've never even heard of, and you blame me?

I´ve been accused of being in a cult but you are in your own little gang regarding your obsession with his work. Mainly libellous insults and childish rattle-throwing.

If you didn't want us to refer to you as a mudlark^WP, you should have picked a more sober name.

As opposed to the upstanding citizens here Will?

Now that we're on a first-name basis, may we call you mud?

Lie after lie. Disinfo and insults the par for debate.

That's a pretty good summary of Rob Balsamo's style of argument.

It's also a pretty good summary of your approach to facts.

Like Rob, I ADMIT my mistakes publically. A quality severely lacking in these pages.

Of Rob's infamous 11.2g/10.14g/2223g/58g errors for a problem whose correct result is less than 2g, Rob has admitted to only half of those errors.

WHERE is this SOC path? At LEAST the NOC witnesses provided "yellow lines"

You won't accept purple lines or yellow push-pins?

What I have just presented may be simplified as a lot of lurkers reading this are laymen themselves on the subject but the SOC STRAIGHT path which runs south of the VDOT antenna according to 22 seconds of data and as required for the physical damage.

All they really need to know is that the FDR data is consistent with the SoC path extrapolated from the Pentagon through the light poles.

Of course, it doesn't hurt for them to understand that the yellow CIT lines are not consistent with the majority of eyewitness reports, FDR data, physical damage, and the remains of Flight 77 passengers and equipment found within and outside the Pentagon.