New TWA Flight 800 film coming out

[thedopefishlives]

I see no evidence for that statement.

All due respect to you, Jay, but he has done extensive reading - of a single source of (mis)information, Cashill. Evidence for extensive reading of other sources of any kind, however, is lacking as noted.

 

[JayUtah]

Nice try but no. It's clear there were many cases of wreckage removal with many pieces.

Begging the question.

What was your explanation for your man in the hangar banging the tank floor downward with a hammer? That's illegal manipulation of forensic evidence.

You're not a forensic engineer or investigator. I don't consider you an authority on what constitutes legal procedure in an investigation. Nor does continuing to try to poke holes in another's investigation validate yours.

 

[carlitos]

Cashill:


ENGINEER TAKES FBI TO COURT


Read more at (hot link removed)

1. A "hot link" is an embedded photo where you are borrowing someone else's bandwidth to post it here.
2. Why did you remove the link to what you quoted?
3. When I said to "paste a few paragraphs" I assumed that you had read the Membership Agreement, notably rule 4. Don't post walls o'text here, just a link and summary or a few paragraphs.

Good luck with this.

The facts will back me on this like the bridge-shaking.

 

[beachnut]

I've done extensive reading on this. I tried to Google the source to no avail. However any basic Googling of the subject will show the seeker that Medical Examiner Charles Wetli identified round shrapnel pellets that FBI sent to a lab. The information I posted was from a conversation with Wetli where he elaborated further about the metals contained in those pellets as being the precise metals used in missile warhead shrapnel. This was recorded by FBI in their 30 page analysis of the pellets which they then illegally failed to return to Wetli's jurisdiction.

The facts will back me on this like the bridge-shaking. For those more familiar with the case it is the basis for Sephton's lawsuit against FBI.

It is hard to source the woo from inside nuts minds - that is where this comes from. Good luck. And Google is the best source for this nonsense on Flt 800, which blew up due to CWT issues. But ignore the facts and google up some woo to go.

The removal of evidence was done by nuts who don't understand aircraft accidents. There was a nut working with the NTSB who was in charge of tagging stuff, not a scientist, not an engineer, not trained in the meat analyzing the accident for cause. Google on.

You googled your way to fantasy of a shoot down, and ignore all the reality based evidence. Where were you trained in aircraft accident investigation? USC, or where?

The MACH 4 stuff was cool, but woo, big woo; next learn about RADAR before joining silly fantasy makers at MACH 4. Have you listened to MACH 4 missile and debris paths? What did you hear? I have, have you? Zero witnesses reported what you would experience with MACH 4 debris paths. lol, that was funny, MACH 4. On RADAR...

 

[Jetblast]

I don't have to explain it. An aircraft destroyed by an anti-aircraft missile will either have 1. high velocity fragment penetrations or 2. high velocity fragment penetrations and explosive residue. It can never have just explosive residue.

You are forgetting the context of this is the investigators smuggled-out a swatch of seat fabric coated in a strange reddish purple residue. When private investigator James Sanders had it tested at a bona fide New Mexico laboratory it tested as being PETN. A substance used in US missiles as a propellant. FBI then seized all samples and threatened Sanders with jail. They were then caught lying about NASA scientist Charley Basset testing the substance as seat glue. So where we are in reality is FBI failed to disprove the substance as being PETN.

Your answer above is invalid and is the obvious dodge that it is. In normal evidence when you have witnesses seeing missiles, government caught trying to deny it, and pure evidence of missile exhaust residue, you are safely on the proof side. If this was a drone that penetrated Flight 800's fuselage it would perfectly explain the forensics.

I take your response as the obvious concession of the proof that it is. Any chance we could do a test of Boeing seat fabric with missile exhaust and compare it to the residue?


Thanks.

 

[matt.tansy]

Nice try but no. It's clear there were many cases of wreckage removal with many pieces.

There are only a few allegations of removed wreckage.

95% of the fuselage was recovered. What are the odds two missiles that fragment into 10,000 pieces each, one missile which must have detonated inside the aircraft in order to eject debris at Mach 4, and a kamikaze Cessna, would only hit the missing 5% of the aircraft and a few alleged stolen pieces?

What was your explanation for your man in the hangar banging the tank floor downward with a hammer? That's illegal manipulation of forensic evidence.

Your answer doesn't nearly address what Hughes and others said.

My answer exposed Hughes for the right-wing conspiracy nut he is. He said the aircraft still has missile fragment penetrations in it yet Stalcup was given complete access to the reconstructed fuselage. D'oh!

 

[Jetblast]

It is hard to source the woo from inside nuts minds - that is where this comes from. Good luck. And Google is the best source for this nonsense on Flt 800, which blew up due to CWT issues. But ignore the facts and google up some woo to go.

...

I think you are trying to scuttle the thread by inducing a momentum of name-calling. It's funny how the pilots, engineers, veteran investigators, military, cops, scientists, aviation indisers and other top credibility professionals involved in this managed to get by the nut filter and become the top level pros they were in their careers.

 

[Jetblast]

There are only a few allegations of removed wreckage.

95% of the fuselage was recovered. What are the odds two missiles that fragment into 10,000 pieces each, one missile which must have detonated inside the aircraft in order to eject debris at Mach 4, and a kamikaze Cessna, would only hit the missing 5% of the aircraft and a few alleged stolen pieces?

Not alleged. The Long Island police caught FBI removing wreckage late at night. This is illegal and they weren't punished. You have a very generous sense of tolerance considering the strict approach you pretend.


What are the odds that shrapnel pellets being discovered and analyzed as shrapnel pellets wouldn't be shrapnel pellets? Especially when your side has no explanation for them and the investigation illegally withheld them?

You have yet to answer why the ejecta plume all went in one direction and how that corresponds to the alleged fuel tank explosion?

That's the way forensic evidence works. It's like being a little bit pregnant.

My answer exposed Hughes for the right-wing conspiracy nut he is. He said the aircraft still has missile fragment penetrations in it yet Stalcup was given complete access to the reconstructed fuselage. D'oh!

Ah, Hughes detailed the shrapnel penetrations were cited by his investigators and then disappeared. You argument is tremendously weak.

 

[JayUtah]

... it tested as being PETN. A substance used in US missiles as a propellant.

PETN is not a propellant.

FBI then seized all samples and threatened Sanders with jail.

Unlikely, since the FBI was the one to announce the PETN findings.

In normal evidence when you have witnesses seeing missiles, government caught trying to deny it, and pure evidence of missile exhaust residue, you are safely on the proof side.

I do not accept you as an authority on forensic examination, investigation, or procedures. We have discussed the witness evidence. We have discussed the alleged "denial." We have discussed the residue. As I said, poking holes in someone else's investigation does not validate yours.

If this was a drone that penetrated Flight 800's fuselage it would perfectly explain the forensics.

You are not a forensic engineer or investigator. And we've gone from missile to suicide plane to drone. Please find a hypothesis and stick with it. You've now claimed the forensic evidence backs up three different, incompatible conclusions.

I take your response as the obvious concession of the proof that it is.

Do not put words or arguments into your critics' mouths. Deal with the arguments they provide, not with the ones you wish they had instead.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Jetblast, are you Cashill?

 

[JayUtah]

Not alleged. The Long Island police caught FBI removing wreckage late at night. This is illegal and they weren't punished.

If no one was punished then it remains an allegation.

You have yet to answer why the ejecta plume all went in one direction and how that corresponds to the alleged fuel tank explosion?

No, asked and answered. You simply disregard the answer, likely because you don't understand it.

That's the way forensic evidence works.

You are not an expert in forensic sciences.

You[r] argument is tremendously weak.

Why do you insist on declaring victory with practically every post? Are you afraid to let the readers decide whose argument is better or weaker?

 

[beachnut]

I think you are trying to scuttle the thread by inducing a momentum of name-calling. It's funny how the pilots, engineers, veteran investigators, military, cops, scientists, aviation indisers and other top credibility professionals involved in this managed to get by the nut filter and become the top level pros they were in their careers.

Top level pros? lol, they have a silly fantasy. top level.

Name all your experts, you have some nuts who think 800 was shot down, and they present zero evidence. What they do present is ignorance of math, physics, and RADAR.

They all failed - now a thread about a movie of woo appears, and all you present is regurgitated nonsense made up by people who only expose their ignorance and present nothing of value.

You can't source your best fantasy stuff to reality. The reality is the AC packs would overheat the CWT and make the fumes explosive.

If they had no operated the AC on the ground for an extended period, there would be no excessive heat, no explosion. Reality hits and those who think 800 was shot down have illusion from witnesses.

This is why 800 was in the news, so many witnesses illusions were weighed as reality, and people failed to check the physics, math, and real evidence.

You have no experts, they are all suffering from a fantasy, not one of them has the same story, they all failed. The movie will not make a difference except fool people who can't do math, physics, and reality (like critical thinking, logic, connecting the dots, etc).

You have fringe group of people, your experts who believe in BS. Google failed. You have no evidence, you have hearsay, lies and BS.

 

[JayUtah]

...and people failed to check the physics, math, and real evidence.

This is what happens in real investigations. Eyewitness testimony still has to conform to objectively determined factors, and theoretical limits. Of all the available kinds of evidence, eyewitness testimony is the least reliable for determining facts.

 

[kookbreaker]

Not alleged. The Long Island police caught FBI removing wreckage late at night.

Who the flipping **** are the 'Long Island Police'?!

 

[carlitos]

Who the flipping **** are the 'Long Island Police'?!

I was wondering the same thing.

 

[beachnut]

Not alleged. The Long Island police caught FBI removing wreckage late at night. This is illegal and they weren't punished. You have a very generous sense of tolerance considering the strict approach you pretend.


What are the odds that shrapnel pellets being discovered and analyzed as shrapnel pellets wouldn't be shrapnel pellets? Especially when your side has no explanation for them and the investigation illegally withheld them?

You have yet to answer why the ejecta plume all went in one direction and how that corresponds to the alleged fuel tank explosion?

That's the way forensic evidence works. It's like being a little bit pregnant.










Ah, Hughes detailed the shrapnel penetrations were cited by his investigators and then disappeared. You argument is tremendously weak.

As you gish gallop away? Try finding some original sources and real evidence. Have you read the report from the NTSB, and all the supporting documents?

And as the OP goes, the RADAR data does not support a missile.

Source your stuff, with original sources, not the hearsay like ... ENGINEER TAKES FBI TO COURT ... Where do you find this stuff?

 

[Jetblast]

So no facts then.

YOu haven't posted a single link or extract or ref apart from some vague ones to the conspiracy pushers.

The gist of what I wrote came from the investigation. Specifically FBI, MIT professor Graeme Sephton, and Long Island Coroner Charles Wetli. Hardly "conspiracy pushers".

 

[tsig]

I've done extensive reading on this. I tried to Google the source to no avail. However any basic Googling of the subject will show the seeker that Medical Examiner Charles Wetli identified round shrapnel pellets that FBI sent to a lab. The information I posted was from a conversation with Wetli where he elaborated further about the metals contained in those pellets as being the precise metals used in missile warhead shrapnel. This was recorded by FBI in their 30 page analysis of the pellets which they then illegally failed to return to Wetli's jurisdiction.

The facts will back me on this like the bridge-shaking. For those more familiar with the case it is the basis for Sephton's lawsuit against FBI.

If you tried to google it with no sucess how can you say that basic googling it will turn it up?

 

[carlitos]

I've done extensive reading on this. I tried to Google the source to no avail. However any basic Googling of the subject will show the seeker that Medical Examiner Charles Wetli identified round shrapnel pellets that FBI sent to a lab.

If you tried to google it with no sucess how can you say that basic googling it will turn it up?

Again, I was wondering the same thing. The only logical conclusion is that our conspiracist friend's skills aren't up to "any basic Googling." Which seems logical, given the rest of the thread. He's probably at remedial or introductory Googling at this point. I wish him the best on improving that.

 

[Jetblast]

And as the OP goes, the RADAR data does not support a missile.

Ah, but it does, as the unidirectional ejecta plume that no one can answer proves. You can't have a one-sided plume from a fuel tank explosion that the fuel tank forensics in the hangar show blew-out symmetrically, as well as your CIA animation. Tansy's contrived radar excuses don't answer this. So, actually, the radar does support a missile. Tansy's arguments were false, by the way, because you can still extract the mach 4 ejecta from the data. ALL the forensics are on our side. None are on yours, which is why the official investigation was unable to show any evidence of a center tank explosion being the cause.