8 out of 8 at Citgo station

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

As if he couldn't tell if the plane is flying directly over his shop or on the other side of the street behind the VDOT. Your buddy Larson also established that Paik witnessed the plane over his shop. This is desperate nonsense.

If it makes you feel any better CE, I heard Flight 93 fly over my house when I was inside. I couldn't tell where it came from, but knew by watching the news afterwards.

If Paik was inside the shop, he'd have no idea where the hell Flight 77 was coming from.

 

[DGM]

Still nobody presented a single SoC witness. Will you be the first? No.

Still can't answer my simple question. Don't feel bad, Craig couldn't either.




BTW: Morin=SoC

 

[The Big Dog]

As if he couldn't tell if the plane is flying directly over his shop or on the other side of the street behind the VDOT. Your buddy Larson also established that Paik witnessed the plane over his shop. This is desperate nonsense.

Talk about desperate nonsense, CE.

Your heroes, Shaky and the Buffet Slayer fabricated Paik's story. He saw the plane from INSIDE his building, and your boys lied about it. You think he has a transparent ceiling, sport?

Stop smoking Craig's weed, ya dope.

 

[BCR]

As if he couldn't tell if the plane is flying directly over his shop or on the other side of the street behind the VDOT. Your buddy Larson also established that Paik witnessed the plane over his shop. This is desperate nonsense.

Now who is lying. Don't try selling that BS to someone who has been there and talked to these folks. I don't have time for lying trolls.

 

[Childlike Empress]

BTW: Morin=SoC

Nope. Here's Craig's conversation with Morin - it was posted before in this thread. He is a 100% NoC witness, regardless of the disingenious constructions you guys come up with.

Over the Navy Annex

Google Video This video is not hosted by the ISF, the ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

 

[A W Smith]

As if he couldn't tell if the plane is flying directly over his shop or on the other side of the street behind the VDOT. Your buddy Larson also established that Paik witnessed the plane over his shop. This is desperate nonsense.

nonsense, For it to be over his shop two conditions would have to be met.

1. His shop would need to have a glass ceiling
2. The plane would need to fly off the balcony of the Sheraton

 

[DGM]

Nope. Here's Craig's conversation with Morin - it was posted before in this thread. He is a 100% NoC witness, regardless of the disingenious constructions you guys come up with.

Over the Navy Annex

Google Video This video is not hosted by the ISF, the ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

So, he is the worlds fastest sprinter?



I also find it strange that Paik would even think the plane hit the antenna considering he claims it was no wheres near it.

 

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

I like in that video where it says:

Witness Terry Morin refused to give us permission to report what he told us.

If he refused to give permission of his report, then it was given without his knowledge or permission.

So that must mean that the Truthers are putting words in his mouth & completely misrepresenting his statements.

 

[A W Smith]

if the air force memorial, had been built, the plane would have flown into it

QED south of Citgo witness,

 

[sheeplesnshills]

The post contains everything you need to know. No context needed. beachnut spread the rumor that CIT were lying about Paik's testimony and I exposed that it was him who was doing so, including re-naming the image of Paik. He is pointing east, on the north side of Columbia Pike. "North" in the argument.

LOL North of Columbia Pike is still South of the Citgo

Yet beachnut renamed it from "edwardpointsnorth.gif" to "edwardpointsouth.gif" and pretended that Paik was pointing to the "real/official" flight path.

Given that he says he thought it hit the VDOT tower thats exactly what he is doing. Thats the big tower behind and to the south of him.

 

[Childlike Empress]

LOL North of Columbia Pike is still South of the Citgo

"Official/real" flight path (blue) never crosses Columbia Pike in that area. No wiggle room, folks. Give it up.

 

[The Big Dog]

[qimg]http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a327/lytetrip/Pentagon/flight%20path/AllGroupsMap.jpg[/qimg]

"Official/real" flight path (blue) never crosses Columbia Pike in that area. No wiggle room, folks. Give it up.

Ahem:

North of Columbia Pike is still South of the Citgo

Got that raw video yet?

 

[Childlike Empress]

Yes it is. As one can see in the overview which is correctly norded. But one can also see how those words you are using are designed to mislead.

No wiggle room.

 

[Myriad]

But one can also see how those words you are using are designed to mislead.

Yes, it's very misleading to call someone a "South of the Citgo" witness when they reported the plane went south of the Citgo, but not the exact distance south that the evil gubmint says it did.

In order to not be misleading, we must call anyone who did not place the plane precisely on the radar track a "North of the Citgo witness," whether they say the plane went north of the Citgo or south.

Respectfully,
Myriad

 

[tsig]

As if he couldn't tell if the plane is flying directly over his shop or on the other side of the street behind the VDOT. Your buddy Larson also established that Paik witnessed the plane over his shop. This is desperate nonsense.

How does he see a plane over his shop when he was in his shop?

 

[beachnut]

The evidence shows that no 757 hit the Pentagon. ...

In your dumbed down paranoid fantasy.

Where RADAR, DNA, and FDR do not exist.

OMG, you do have evidence...

... , duhbunkies.

Evidence you make weak insults. Weak. Where is your evidence? Al Gore's lock box? lol, you got nothing, and this is why 10 years of failure is a sure thing for you dee-truther, or duh-truther. Equally weak, but you are the best debunker we have for CIT at JREF.

You debunk yourself all the time.

*... Don't expect to see me much around, but i'll keep you informed if something important happens. Again, happy new year duhbunkies, and bye.

You debunk yourself, and you debunk CIT's NoC flyover nut case fantasy.

"Official/real" flight path (blue) never crosses Columbia Pike in that area. No wiggle room, folks. Give it up.

Paik's path, a CIT witness is in cyan. He points to it. But you are not trained to do more than post, or let CIT post for you. Is Ranke visiting you? Your post sure are CIT like, as in dumb.

No wiggle room? lol, you have over 8 wiggle room impossible flight paths.

Which flight path is it? You have no clue!

You can't do math, physics or aerodynamics or you would see the flight paths you can't choose are all impossible. Like CIT you lack the skills to investigate 911, and Flight 77.

Which is your flight path, the CIT flight path? Wait for it... You don't have a viable flight path, you have witnesses who saw shadows, 77, and describe the flight path of 77 on the track over the ground that is close to the cyan line. You failed again, and you will fail on your next post, it is your destiny to believe the lies of idiots, and do if for years without learning math, physics, and more.

Which flight path? How can it be all of them? Wait... they are from witnesses who have no clue how far 77 was from them.

Wiggle room? How many paths do you have? This debunks the NoC big time. In your logic, you say witnesses flight paths are evidence. You have no flight path, you have many conflicting paths. Which one is it? Wiggle room!

 

[carlitos]

perhaps?

How does he see a plane over his shop when he was in his shop?

 

[A W Smith]

Yes it is. As one can see in the overview which is correctly norded. But one can also see how those words you are using are designed to mislead.

No wiggle room.

http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html#middle

http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html#special

 

[I Ratant]

Still can't answer my simple question. Don't feel bad, Craig couldn't either.




BTW: Morin=SoC

.
It's something like this....

 

[Childlike Empress]

Yes, it's very misleading to call someone a "South of the Citgo" witness when they reported the plane went south of the Citgo, but not the exact distance south that the evil gubmint says it did.

In order to not be misleading, we must call anyone who did not place the plane precisely on the radar track a "North of the Citgo witness," whether they say the plane went north of the Citgo or south.

No, it's very misleading to claim that someone who reports the same as all the other witnesses - that the plane approached over the Navy Annex and flew between the cemetery and (north of) the CITGO station - is a "SoC" witness as if the argument would be that the plane was ALWAYS NORTH OF THE CITGO. Knowing perfectly well that this is not the argument. That's misleading. I told you what a SoC witness is:

Care to come up with a SoC witness? That's someone who was in a good position to judge and describes the plane on the official path and speed, contradicting the NoC witnesses. Good luck.

It's called North/South of CITGO because the CITGO is the crucial vantage point where no mistakes are possible.

Respectfully

Sure.