I pointed you to #165/#180. In #181 i clarified what i was talking about for those who didn't pay attention. Please show me where i got it wrong and beachnut got it right (remember, i presented the original "edwardpointsnorth.gif" in #180).
Show a lie of mine, retract your statement or get reported. You have one hour.
"Interesting" (well, not really) btw that still nobody of the little groupthinking coward gang commented on the manipulative stunts of beachnut that i've shown in #165 and #180, and the many lies by several participants that mudlark exposed.
Ah, it's him again. In #165 i did prove your earlier statement to be completely wrong, and you mislead poor twinstead. I didn't see your apology to him or CIT, funk.
Ah, it's him again. In #165 i did prove your earlier statement to be completely wrong, and you mislead poor twinstead. I didn't see your apology to him or CIT, funk.
I haven't been misled. I've seen both sides of this delightful little debate, and find your insistence that the 'evidence' presented by CIT is relevant as both perplexing, because you appear to be smarter than that, and humorous, because you appear to be quite serious about this ludicrous 'theory'.
I haven't been misled. I've seen both sides of this delightful little debate, and find your insistence that the 'evidence' presented by CIT is relevant as both perplexing, because you appear to be smarter than that, and humorous, because you appear to be quite serious about this ludicrous 'theory'.
I pointed you to #165/#180. In #181 i clarified what i was talking about for those who didn't pay attention. Please show me where i got it wrong and beachnut got it right (remember, i presented the original "edwardpointsnorth.gif" in #180).
Paik clearly points out the south flight path that is verified by police, DNA, RADAR, FDR, and impact damage.
The physics of flight at 483 KIAS make all the NoC flight paths pure moronic delusions made up by CIT; who can't do math; why can't you do math to check the failed paths of CIT?
Paik points out the south flight path; CIT failed, and your lack of evidence and ignoring evidence will not help.
ASRS won't do anything, except laugh at his mind-boggling stupidity. By design they don't have any enforcement capability whatsoever.
It speaks more to Cap'n Bob's total disconnect with reality more than anything else. The most favorable possibility is that he knows ASRS is totally uninterested in his crap, but he thinks by submitting it he acts like he's doing something useful, for the purpose of duping Truthers and adding to his little cult of personality. The problem with this approach, of course, is that it is selective for idiots, and one winds up with a circle of followers that have no competence to speak of -- basically what he's got now.
More likely, however, I think he's just flailing. There's no evidence he's any smarter than his followers.
Paik clearly points out the south flight path that is verified by police, DNA, RADAR, FDR, and impact damage.
The physics of flight at 483 KIAS make all the NoC flight paths pure moronic delusions made up by CIT; who can't do math; why can't you do math to check the failed paths of CIT?
Paik points out the south flight path; CIT failed, and your lack of evidence and ignoring evidence will not help.
Thank you beachnut, this is the image I was talking about. The road is Columbia Pike, the Antenna on the right is the VDOT tower. The "real/official" flight path never crosses the road and goes roughly parallel to it on the other side of the antenna. "South side" means roughly on the other side of the road and antenna from this perspective.
You claim that Paik's drawing and testimony come close to this flight path. Your image is called "Edwardpointsouth.gif".
funk de fino claims that CIT are deceptive about his testimony and "edited it to try and shoehorn it into their falsehoods".
The blue line is the "real/official" flight path, the yellow lines are the witness testimonies. The yellow line close to bottom left is Edward Paik's testimony according to Craig. Notice the VDOT tower in relation to the blue and the yellow line and how the yellow line crosses the road while the blue one doesn't.
Now we need Paik's testimony to see who is deceptive about it.
Here is "NSA" again. The witness testimonies start at around 16:00 into the video. Edward Paik is the first one. The sequence that beachnut uses for his animated gif comes shortly after 17:00, but he has used the original footage while Craig added the labeling I remembered for "NSA". "Columbia Pike" and "north side".
Paik points to the south flight path and CIT's impossible flight path is fraud. If you like fraud, you will love and support CIT's failed presentation.
Ed Paik on location shows that indeed Ed was INSIDE the shop when he saw the plane. He recreates his actual POV and direction of sighting in this image.
Paik points to the south flight path and to the south. CIT can't do the math to see their flight paths are idiotic lies.
Balsamo in an attempt to support the CIT delusional lies, said he tattled to the same agencies he implies are in on 911. How pathetic can you be and support CIT, as Balsamo's best effort is 2,223 Gs of stupid just like the NoC poppycock he supports; as Paik always pointed out the south flight path.
Ah, it's him again. In #165 i did prove your earlier statement to be completely wrong, and you mislead poor twinstead. I didn't see your apology to him or CIT, funk.
Ironic with a name like Algebra34, your lucky 7 does not help you use math to see all the NoC flight paths presented by ce (now u 2) are impossible.
CIT failed, and since your only support of CIT work is by saying, "debunkers", you too have failed to save CIT ideas from being pure idiotic delusions made up out of ignorance and the lack of physics to understand the flight paths can't be drawn by witnesses observing a high speed large jet from a tangential position. You, ce, and CIT are hilarious as all you present is hearsay and lies to support moronic implications about 911. If only you guys would use real aircraft accident investigators to save you from posting failed support of failed ideas, and failed ideas.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
