You wrote a lot but you never really answered the unidirectional ejecta plume clearly caught on radar. It couldn't have been caused by the center tank exploding, according to your official cause of the crash. Now you are saying the NTSB investigators weren't qualified.
Government screwed-up because 3 KH-11 satellites were in position to observe the crash. They said all three "failed". What are the odds of all three failing at the same time? They screwed-up because they admitted elsewhere that one of the satellites captured the naval ships in the area (which means they were working).
You don't have a single NTSB investigator on your side who is qualified to determine the cause of the crash.
You make up stuff like the unidirectional ejecta, and never source it, or explain it, or prove it. It is called BS, a tactic of throwing BS out, gish gallop. What next.
You failed to explain the AOA, except with talk.'
You failed to explain the MACH 4 and show the data, again talk.
Your expert says jet fuel fumes can't explode, and it does.
You gish gallop with the satellites, as if they mean anything.
You don't realize you have hearsay, fantasy and nonsense as your evidence.
You have failed to prove any of your points. You can't answer any of the questions which rise from your gish gallop posts. Not one single answer, as you keep throwing out nonsense instead of stopping collecting your wits to see you don't have evidence, you have googled up poppycock as if it was real.
You need a better answer. There's science attached to this that would have condensed and cooled any alleged fuel vapors.
Wrong again.
The science says the fuel in the CWT was in the zone for a fuel fume explosion with a spark. oops, you never read the truth, you got the fantasy search filter stuck on your search engine. It is funny how you can only present lies, fantasy, and nonsense.
For Flight 800 running the AC packs on the ground caused extreme temperatures in the CWT. Flt 800 was on an extended ground delay, which had the AC running (a problem since there was no fuel in the CWT to act as a Heat Sink). The temperature and pressure are keys to an explosive mixture, and that was the issue at 13,000 feet.
The science says the jet fuel fumes were explosive, you made up your science, called talk, or BS, or nonsense, which is based on what you make up. The real science debunks you, and you could check the data, but don't; you prefer lies and nonsense.
Fuel study based on science, not on woo.
http://www.fire.tc.faa.gov/pdf/ar98-26.pdf
The Final TWA 800 report found at the NTSB site.
http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/reports/2000/AAR0003.pdf
You haven't answerd the nose gear assembly blast striations with your contrived evasions.
The doors were blasted inward. There's no explanation for that with an internal fuel tank explosion.
??? there is no stop to your gish gallop - impact with the water is enough to blast nose gear door in. Where is your study, the source for this BS?
You owe me an AOA study too.
You bring up the crazy claims, you have to support them with facts and evidence. You have failed to do much more than post more crazy claims.
