[minor nitpick]Yes, but he used 770 fps for the flying speed and it should be 780 fps.[/minor nitpick]
Challenge to CIT
- Thread starter Reheat
- Start date
-
- Tags
- cit edward paik pentagon
[minor nitpick]Yes, but he used 770 fps for the flying speed and it should be 780 fps.[/minor nitpick]
jhunter1163
beer-swilling semiliterate
The sad thing is, they have a chance here to do something that actually kind of resembles real science. Their witnesses' statements, in totality, give a flightpath that is aerodynamically impossible. So, instead of dismissing a witness(es) account or adjusting their proposed approach, they call the people who demonstrated their error "shills".
Sad, it is.
Sad, it is.
Domenick (TC329) now wants me to work backwards from the impact point and determine what flight path is possible to make NoC work.
http://s1.zetaboards.com/LooseChangeForums/topic/191706/2/
Message to Domenick: Why don't you come on over here and argue your points. We are cordial and you are a member here. I am not registered at LCF and have no desire to do that.
Domenick, old pal, old buddy, I like you and all of that, but you've upset me for using an innocent and confused woman at Shanksville in an attempt to promote a deluded and false fantasy. Anyone who would do that is a charlatan, a fraud, and a dishonorable person. Go and sincerely apologize to her in person, show the apology on tape at Utube and then I'll feel better and may be inclined to help you with the NoC problem.
As it is now, I'm not inclined to do your work for you. You don't pay enough!
Another reason is that I've already discredited your witnesses as the NoC flight path is impossible by adhering to their irrefutable, Independently verified, Scientifically Corroborated testimony. Now, you want me to FURTHER discredit their solemn and indisputable word. Domenick, I'm not a dishonorable person and I don't want to further embarrass anyone, so until you go sincerely apologize to Susan McElwin (sic), tape it and post it on UTube, I will not help you.
http://s1.zetaboards.com/LooseChangeForums/topic/191706/2/
Message to Domenick: Why don't you come on over here and argue your points. We are cordial and you are a member here. I am not registered at LCF and have no desire to do that.
Domenick, old pal, old buddy, I like you and all of that, but you've upset me for using an innocent and confused woman at Shanksville in an attempt to promote a deluded and false fantasy. Anyone who would do that is a charlatan, a fraud, and a dishonorable person. Go and sincerely apologize to her in person, show the apology on tape at Utube and then I'll feel better and may be inclined to help you with the NoC problem.
As it is now, I'm not inclined to do your work for you. You don't pay enough!
Another reason is that I've already discredited your witnesses as the NoC flight path is impossible by adhering to their irrefutable, Independently verified, Scientifically Corroborated testimony. Now, you want me to FURTHER discredit their solemn and indisputable word. Domenick, I'm not a dishonorable person and I don't want to further embarrass anyone, so until you go sincerely apologize to Susan McElwin (sic), tape it and post it on UTube, I will not help you.
Last edited:
A W Smith
Philosopher
Domenic needs some Motion Related Equations to get started on his query.
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
They would likely claim that the plane taking off was the airborne OPS 747. No proof of that mind you but that never stopped the CIT from accepting their own
The experiment in which you have shown that whiskey does not improve one's applied math skills may actually explain the lack of such skill displayed by the Pft and CIT, though I suspect a different intoxicant.
The spooky music made me jump! Quite pleasant in a synthy kind of way,though. Regret to say I doubt that CIT are much interested in the science content of your linky.
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
TC (DOM), use the online calculator I supplied a link to a page or two back. You can then plug in the parameters you want. You will not have to take Reheat's word for it then.
Keep in mind that you require the plane to be NoC and in only a low bank (say 11 degrees maximum.) Now you can see if there is any possible path by which the plane can pass over Paik and Turcois at any speed that would match the descriptions provided by your witnesses (ie. 'it was moving fast' would suggest something greater than 200 MPH)
Keep in mind that you require the plane to be NoC and in only a low bank (say 11 degrees maximum.) Now you can see if there is any possible path by which the plane can pass over Paik and Turcois at any speed that would match the descriptions provided by your witnesses (ie. 'it was moving fast' would suggest something greater than 200 MPH)
bje
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2007
- Messages
- 1,281
It won't happen.
Ranke has persistently refused to deal with any of the existing evidence nor will he address inconvenient questions. The same goes for Aldo Marquis and Ray Balsamo on pilotsfor911nonsense. This has been the nature of the beast since day one.
I frankly see no point in arguing over flight paths or anything that Ranke brings up. It is wholly immaterial to the overwhelming preponderance of evidence which Ranke cannot possibly deal with. And he knows it. It doesn't matter about flight paths when all of the other evidence that AA 77 hit the Pentagon demonstrates it does. Make Ranke address that evidence. He knows he can't. As long as everyone chooses to argue with him on his terms and his subjects, he will continue to evade the overwhelming other evidence that renders his claims moot. And he will always evade answering inconvenient questions about all of the other evidence.
My advice is to just ignore him, Aldo, and Balsamo. They need an audience of debunkers to survive.
DavidJames
Penultimate Amazing
Has anyone noticed that Ranke has moved the goal posts (they were already there, but I ignored them), and HE MOVED THEM IN THE WRONG DIRECTION.
His little animated .gif on ATS shows the aircraft wings level passing by the Citgo. Well, Craig, just like you I do believe this aspect of your irrefutable, Independently Verified, and Scientifically Corroborated witnesses testimony, so now the aircraft must be wings level on a heading to the impact point by abeam the Citgo.
Now, overall requirements are wings level over Paik's business and wings level abeam the Citgo on the proper heading. Not my requirements, but YOUR WITNESSES and YOURS.
Hey Craig, do you realize how much the G's have gone up now to support your evil, delusional fantasy?
His little animated .gif on ATS shows the aircraft wings level passing by the Citgo. Well, Craig, just like you I do believe this aspect of your irrefutable, Independently Verified, and Scientifically Corroborated witnesses testimony, so now the aircraft must be wings level on a heading to the impact point by abeam the Citgo.
Now, overall requirements are wings level over Paik's business and wings level abeam the Citgo on the proper heading. Not my requirements, but YOUR WITNESSES and YOURS.
Hey Craig, do you realize how much the G's have gone up now to support your evil, delusional fantasy?
Last edited:
Over 8 gs for a simple model over Paik's road position to line up wings level at the north side of the Citgo. That does not account for roll in and out, nor how 77 was lined up at Paik's position. Which in reality it was heading 70 degrees magnetic there, which means you have to go left then right, making this a super impossible feat that the real speed 77 was. It is pure junk as he makes up fantasy.
Since no one saw banks of more than 6 to 11 degree for the last 20 seconds of flight, only a very straight in approach to the Pentagon is possible. One or two degrees in heading difference in the last 20 seconds, and this why some people near the impact saw 77 getting bigger for 10 seconds.
For the most part I find quite a few members here to be awfully annoying and while they profess to possess a level of superiour intelligence I find most of the responses to be riddled with ad homs and victory dances. But yes here I am reading through this thread enjoying it yet again. Unfortunately we're only up to page 6 so perhaps I returned too soon.
Can I call you Robert? Reheat just seems so impersonal for an old pal like you. You could just disclose your real first name or I could just randomly insert any first name I please I suppose......
Anyways Tony, let me tell you the next couple months are going to be real real heartwrenching for you when I do release my follow up with Susan. I've made a list of a lot of your concerns and also made sure she saw how Pop Mech/BBC/History Channel portrayed her story. Along with that was my DVD interview with Mrs. McElwain. Needless to say Susan is not upset with me in the least bit because I portrayed her account with 1000% honesty. I can't say the same for the BBC but thats something for Mr. Weick to continually back out of.
But here's where it gets worse for you.
Susan isn't the only interview I've done but time will tell all truths. Naturally I will make note of this and remind you at the proper time. Although it will be quite hard to convince people I've tricked over a dozen people or that they are all liars.
As it is now, I'm not inclined to do your work for you. You don't pay enough!
Let's face it your work really is of no value to me. But I tell you what you take the scenario and since your so insistent on determining the exact flight path feel free to work it backwards and present your findings. We will be more than gracious to examine your claims and see how they fit/clash with the eyewitnesses. You do a good job and dinner's on me (figuratively).
Thank you for the not help. I appreciate it. Naturally I will expect you to make a youtube video of yourself personally apologizing to Mrs. McElwain in the near future where her account is corroborated and she is vindicated against the merciless attacks she must endure from hardcore neonazicon bootlickers.
Shame too, you seem a tad more intelligent than a lot of the rift raft. I can't imagine you being a supporting of this neonazicon administration and it's ******** policies.
Perhaps when I release my full Flight 93 documentary you will finally answer the wake up that your fellow citizens have been trying to phone in to you for the last 6 years.
All the best,
Dom
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
TC:
So can we safely say that you found one woman to victimize while you call the hundreds of others that investigated the scene liars?
So can we safely say that you found one woman to victimize while you call the hundreds of others that investigated the scene liars?
DavidJames
Penultimate Amazing
For the biggest crime in the history of the U.S., you will release a documentary and you will post on Internet forums. But you won't go to the mainstream media or authorities.
We shouldn't be surprised, charlatans and con artists prefer to work in the shadows, avoid the light of day or, dare I say the light of truth? What a sad and pathetic existence you lead.
uruk
Philosopher
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2003
- Messages
- 5,311
So I guess that'll be one more amature, dubiously edited, wittness leading, cherry picked waste of youtube bandwidth that'll be hocked for $19.00 a DVD?
With a techno-hip-hop soundtrack to boot. I can't wait.
Be sure to stress how testimony from human memory that is over eight years old is superior to the laws of physics.
nicepants
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2007
- Messages
- 1,723
Wouldn't that make him an accomplice of some sort? (Even more-so than any of us, because he actually believes he has evidence of mass-murder and is refusing to act on it.) Shame on you, TC.
jhunter1163
beer-swilling semiliterate
Actually, it's only six and a half years, although by the time CIT gets around to releasing the followup to Pentacorn it might be eight years.
Last edited:
Your paranoia is noted. Bootlicking? Only if you and rob's (sock puppets) were in charge, would the world be as you see it. Irony (hypocrisy)For the most part I find quite a few members here to be awfully annoying and while they profess to possess a level of superiour intelligence ...
Anyways Tony, let me tell you the next couple months are going to be real real heartwrenching for you when I do release my follow up with Susan. ...
But here's where it gets worse for you.
Susan isn't the only interview I've done but time will tell all truths. Naturally I will make note of this and remind you at the proper time. Although it will be quite hard to convince people I've tricked over a dozen people or that they are all liars.
Let's face it your work really is of no value to me. But I tell you what you take the scenario and since your so insistent on determining the exact flight path feel free to work it backwards and present your findings. We will be more than gracious to examine your claims and see how they fit/clash with the eyewitnesses. You do a good job and dinner's on me (figuratively).
... from hardcore neonazicon bootlickers.
Shame too, you seem a tad more intelligent than a lot of the rift raft. I can't imagine you being a supporting of this neonazicon administration and it's ******** policies.
Perhaps when I release my full Flight 93 documentary you will finally answer the wake up that your fellow citizens have been trying to phone in to you for the last 6 years.
All the best,
Dom
Right, great claims of greatness and we will see what? Another nothing video where you do a perfect class room video for how witnesses statement may not seem right but actually fit with (the fly over by the plane asked by the FAA to check it out) reality if you take the time to do it right, but your video clearly shows (weakly) how to misuse witnesses statements and mess up everything without saying much. Did I miss where there was some conclusion on that video that was suppose to make sense? Anyone?
No, your great video will only prove to others what the bootlickers here already know. There is a new form of snake oil salesmen on the internet. Beware.
Final word, have you ever pulled over 8Gs? Impossible; your flight path made up from thin air is, impossible.
I noticed the big change after the Susan Video hit the internet, can we expect more or less of an impact on the super version of how to take witnesses and make up just about any story we want Video. ???