8 out of 8 at Citgo station

[Grizzly Bear]

So you're going to ignore facts and just take CITs' word on what happened no matter how ridiculous?

He's already done this for several pages now just in discussing his case from the legal perspective; this shouldn't be surprising really. It's his/her problem, no one else's, and I don't see anything else worth discussing since he/she refuses to even acknowledge any of those points.

 

[achimspok]

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/9907451897c0442ad.gif[/qimg]

Your animated GIF is a hoax and your view showing it approaching the Pentagon "from the same view", hitting the light poles, was an obvious manipulation - a case for Mobertermy, as I said, but I was just pretending that I thought he would jump on it.

Your smiley tells a lot about your ability two understand perspective.
Indeed, both animated gifs show the very same flight path.

Here is a third view:

Here is a top view:

Something that you don't understand isn't necessarily a hoax.

 

[achimspok]

Morin's testimony again

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

Morin: From where I am it appears over the edge of the Naval Annex not completely over it, right?
Ranke: ...but but but the plane itself will be on the north side of Columbia Pike at this point.
Morin: Yeah. I mean this is Columbia Pike, okay? There is a fence right here. I'm inside the fence, okay? But he went right over the top.

So how you wanna do it? The drawing of AWSmith is fine for the start. Morin ran out...

Morin:Look at the guy who wear suspenders. I wear suspenders.

...so he probably didn't ran very far in 3-5 seconds. He was inside the fence.
Now we need to know how he was able two see the plane all the way to the Pentagon. Just the airfram sank behind the trees.

Any idea?

 

[Childlike Empress]

Yes, that's a truthful representation of the "real/offical" flight path (edit: although it has a little strange bank there that isn't supported by the official data, and it doesn't fly south of the VDOT like it should ... see below). Pay attention to where the Navy Annex is, audience.

Any idea how the little fat guy with the suspenders (self description) got there? Well, I would say it was quite some time after he saw the plane flying over the Navy Annex while he was between the wings. What would you say, Achim?

 

[Childlike Empress]

After further viewing: No, it's again BS what Achim is presenting here. The latter part of the flight is correct, but the "bank" distorts how it should approach according to the data - to the "right" of the antenna in the beginning, at the same angle it takes later.

Busted again.

 

[achimspok]

[qimg]http://img529.imageshack.us/img529/2985/vdotnorthapproachsm.gif[/qimg]

Yes, that's a truthful representation of the "real/offical" flight path (edit: although it has a little strange bank there that isn't supported by the official data, and it doesn'tfly south of the VDOT like it should). Pay attention to where the Navy Annex is, audience.

Any idea how the little fat guy with the suspenders (self description) got there? Well, I would say it was quite some time after he saw the plane flying over the Navy Annex while he was between the wings. What would you say, Achim?

NO, that's not the official flight path. This was the most probable path according to the witnesses before I dealt with the FDR. However, the FDR path is south (right) of the VDOT.
But you got the point. Just 3 witnesses reported some left bank or yaw to the left. Lagasse was one of them. Most of the witnesses report a right bank.
So take the right bank into account when you start drawing the line of sight for Morin.

The little fat guy with the suspenders is YOUR CIT WITNESS Terry Morin.
Of course, he didn't carry the blue box across the Pentagon lawn while the plane hit. The images should tell you how far you may expect him to run in 3-5 seconds.
I though it was a good idea to offer this little help before you come up with some olypic record down Columbia Pike to see the plane left and north of Citgo.

Now you know it. You can start your drawing! Use your sword of truth!

 

[Childlike Empress]

Achim's unnecessarily large overview picture posted in #1693 also contains the bank that he just pulled out of his rear end to confuse the issue.

 

[beachnut]

... the distasteful memorial. ...

The best you can do is expose your bias and ignorance as you spread lies developed by idiots; CIT. And this is your only evidence.

 

[achimspok]

After further viewing: No, it's again BS what Achim is presenting here. The latter part of the flight is correct, but the "bank" distorts how it should approach according to the data - to the "right" of the antenna in the beginning, at the same angle it takes later.

Busted again.

You busted yourself!
You already admitted that it looks like "infront" of the memorial. In other words, a plane south of the Annex could indeed look like north of the Annex.

Well, the official path is some feet mor south. I already posted the splitted view of the official path. It doesn't look much different, right? Do you see the difference from the cementery buildings? ...exept the left bank?

 

[Childlike Empress]

NO, that's not the official flight path. This was the most probable path according to the witnesses before I dealt with the FDR. However, the FDR path is south (right) of the VDOT.

I'm awaiting your first truthful representation of the "real/official" flight path, Achim. Interesting that i have to force you into a series of concessions before that happens, isn't it? Don't you think the audience will notice?

 

[achimspok]

Achim's unnecessarily large overview picture posted in #1693 also contains the bank that he just pulled out of his rear end to confuse the issue.

Funny part: All the strange movements of the yellow lines - sometimes jerking at the roofline of the 8th wing.
Btw, the gifs are pretty old now. I didn't that much effort to confuse you.

See, here is a whole set of CIT witness view for a plane on the south side of the Annex just to confuse you totally:
http://s1.zetaboards.com/pumpitout/topic/3490445/

 

[achimspok]

I'm awaiting your first truthful representation of the "real/official" flight path, Achim. Interesting that i have to force you into a series of concessions before that happens, isn't it? Don't you think the audience will notice?

If you would have read my description then no "confession" would be necessary because the "confession" is just the repeated explanation.

Do you know this one?
http://professorstacy.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/don-quixote-windmill.gif

 

[Childlike Empress]

I'm awaiting your first truthful representation of the "real/official" flight path, Achim. Interesting that i have to force you into a series of concessions before that happens, isn't it? Don't you think the audience will notice?

 

[Childlike Empress]

If you would have read my description then no "confession" would be necessary because the "confession" is just the repeated explanation.

Do you know this one?
http://professorstacy.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/don-quixote-windmill.gif

Concession, Achim. Not confession. Although that would be an excellent idea. Please do it, it would help a lot.

 

[achimspok]

I'm awaiting your first truthful representation of the "real/official" flight path, Achim. Interesting that i have to force you into a series of concessions before that happens, isn't it? Don't you think the audience will notice?

HERE IT IS FOR THE THIRD TIME!
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6789581&postcount=1368

May be you decite to have a look...?

 

[Childlike Empress]

Give it up, Achim. My line of sight in the mug shot clearly shows that the plane hit the Pentagon, just like your fake technobabble.

 

[Childlike Empress]

C-E - this is now a very long thread. Would you be able to direct me to a web page or article that succinctly and accurate summarises this issue from your perspective (you must know how unenlightening reading long forum threads can be).

"National Security Alert", the video summarizing CIT's investigation in 2009, is the best source you can get to date. It's on page one of this thread and posted many times during the precession. As you saw, it stands up to scrutiny.

 

[GlennB]

While you're here, CE, do you realise that all of those yellow NoC 'flight-paths' require remarkable bank angles (in the 60-80° range, IIRC)? Something that absolutely nobody reported?

 

[little grey rabbit]

"National Security Alert", the video summarizing CIT's investigation in 2009, is the best source you can get to date. It's on page one of this thread and posted many times during the precession. As you saw, it stands up to scrutiny.

I will certainly look it at some time, but my internet connection is slow. If off hand you do know of a text based source.

 

[Childlike Empress]

You have to watch the testimonies, rabbit. This is the source material. So no, i don't think there is any text-based source that can account for it. But i'll take a look.