CIT Fraud Revealed

[ElMondoHummus]

Jeez, it's been that long?! I remember when that was posted. This whole CIT nonsense is just a dog chasing its own tail.....around and around and around and around and around...

Dude, remember: That was after Ryan got sick of dealing with them over and over. So the carnival BS merry-go-round goes even farther back than that.

 

[Hokulele]

Seriously, if I really had the power of summoning, don't you think I would have resurrected, well, pretty much anyone else?

 

[Mangoose]

Yeah, I know the "Lyte Trip" days go way back before I joined, but it is just funny that carousel has been going round so constantly that I get surprised to get reminded that something like that is actually X years ago, and not a few months ago.

 

[ElMondoHummus]

Seriously, if I really had the power of summoning, don't you think I would have resurrected, well, pretty much anyone else?

Huh? You mean, you'd rather have someone like Christophera? Or Ultima? Bofors? Jammonius, oddly enough, doesn't match Christophera's depth of delusion (he merely believes in something wackier), he's not as dada-performance-art oblivious as Ultima, and he's not anywhere near being the same kind of jerk that Bofors is. As aggravatingly dumb as he is, he doesn't take the cake as far as intolerable conspiracy addicts. Not in that company.

 

[BCR]

Jeez, it's been that long?! I remember when that was posted. This whole CIT nonsense is just a dog chasing its own tail.....around and around and around and around and around...

It is amazing that it just keeps on going after being throughly discredited and explained. I guess some folks just don't learn very easily. Personally I'm getting rather bored with the CIT/P4T nonsense and don't even waste any significant time with their lunacy beyond poking fun at them (e.g. this thread).

 

[switchpoint]

The guy is pointing to the ceiling in his office!!! IN HIS OFFICE! He is inside! There is an opaque object (roof and ceiling) between him and what he is....witnessing.

I know the clowns in CIT have dismissed eyewitnesses who attest to seeing Flight 77 impact the Pentagon because they think there may have been a tree somewhere between them and the building. But this guy is considered infallible even though he is looking at his office ceiling and attesting to where the plane was.

Give it up.

 

[tsig]

The whole purpose of putting someone on ignore is that you DON'T want/care to see what he posts. If you DO want to see what he posted, take him off ignore.

DA

You are trying to explain physics to someone who can't comprehend how this forum works. I hear pigs singing in the background.

 

[tsig]

The PentaCon Smoking Gun Version and The North Side Flyover but these presentations contain the interviews in full.

The interviews are extremely long and extremely detailed so this is likely why attention to this information didn't take off until they released their more concise presentation National Security Alert just last year.

The average person has a short attention span and apparently you do as well since it seems you have failed to watch the interviews in long form.

Since of course the ONLY detail that is cited by CIT proving 9/11 was an inside job is the north side approach, and since all of these witnesses have names and can be contacted as Larson just proved, this simple claim is 100% verifiable by ANY of you.

Are you really doubting that if CIT had somehow "twisted" their placement of the plane that none of you would have figured it out by now or that none of the witnesses would have spoken out against them?

Larson has confirmed the obvious regarding Ed Paik. The notion that even though Paik's north side flight path is now independently confirmed but that somehow CIT twisted the accounts of Lagasse, Brooks, Turcios, and all the ANC guys to place the plane on the north side is flat-out ridiculous.

Hopefully Larson interviews them as well.

If all the witness saw a pink elephant flying over them it wouldn't matter. One dead body trumps all the visuals.

 

[The Big Dog]

It is amazing that it just keeps on going after being throughly discredited and explained. I guess some folks just don't learn very easily. Personally I'm getting rather bored with the CIT/P4T nonsense and don't even waste any significant time with their lunacy beyond poking fun at them (e.g. this thread).

Aldo has posted a video rebuttal here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPkOv0-u6A0

 

[tsig]

(With apologies to Bill Murray and the movie "Meatballs")

We are the CIT, so pity us!
We're a dork, a fool plus an idiot!
We lead witnesses and quote mine (we're subhuman slime!)
We're the doofus CIT!

You should believe us 'cause we're stupid so we're just like you.


^{Buy my product}

 

[tsig]

You´ve reposted my post but have you actually bothered your a*se to read it?

Go to bed Beachnut. Night night.
Another failed attack on CIT.
Try another NOC witness. I´ll be waiting.

Good NOC, pleasant dreams. The screams you hear are just the dead trying to ask you why you are pissing on their graves.

 

[tsig]

You do understand the difference between drafting software and design software, yes?

He really hasn't made the grade to using software.

 

[tsig]

Says the hero who put me on ignore because I ask for:

1. the raw video

2. the math to support the impossible flight path.

Mudlark is a whore for the tree fort mutts.

We really, really don't want to think what goes on in the tree fort.

(insert slimy infestations of masturbatory fantasies here)

 

[tsig]

If you can e-mail an edible PayDay, you are my new hero.

Your wish is but our command m'lady


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Payday.JPG

 

[tsig]

You don't get out of it that easy!

We still blame you!

That's Lisa.

 

[mudlark]

I know that this is obvious, but who cares if a handful of witnesses:
- are mistaken

The NOC witnesses corraborate the North path.
A ´handful´? They are ALL witnesses on record within that area.
I´m still waiting on ONE SOC witness.
Not ONE other witness contradicts the confirmed and verified NOC path, over the Navy Annex and right bank descriptions.
I´d say that´s more than a ´handful´.

- are being quoted out of context

They are on record. What are you saying? That Craig and Aldo TOLD them what to say?

- are lying

Who exactly is/are lying??
I know Larson started a thread claiming such a nonsense.

This proves nothing, when we have the totality of evidence. The plane couldn't have physically flown where they say.

This evidence is to be discarded on what grounds?
The ´totality of evidence´ is based on the word of government agencies.
The FDR? Even JREFers claim that the officially released data is wrong.
The ´impact time´, that there are seconds ´missing´.

That the plane ´couldn´t have physically flown where they say has been thoroughly refuted.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=15930

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=15854

Critics of this math have been answered here

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=15948&st=20

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=15861

There is no conpiracy. The plane hit the pentagon in front of hundreds of witnesses.

Disinfo, proven in my posts in the 8 out of 8 thread.

The passenger, crew and terrorist DNA was identified at the Pentagon. It's an open-and-shut case.

There are no records on chain of custody of said DNA.

We know for an absolute fact that eyewitness testimony is unreliable, especially after years go by. Therefore, CIT is wrong. Their beliefs are not reality-based.

I know for an absolute fact that it is impossible that not one witness out of ´hundreds´ could fail to report or describe the SOC approach.
Again with the NOC witnesses described events ´after years go by´

FALSE.

Moreover, the fact that "CIT" won't do anything with this bombshell information, except try to make a few bucks on DVDs and win admiration on the internet, simply confirms their irrelevance. I realize that they are annoying, but really my life is just fine whether mudlark defends them or not.

They along with Pilotsfor911truth HAVE been sending this information for years to various media outlets. That the mainstream media fails to act on this shows (as they have always done) that they have no backbone and/or complete bias.
I constantly see this bs on them making money from DVD sales. ALL THEIR VIDEOS ARE FREE. Stop lying.

My life is just fine too Carlitos. I´ll keep correcting your erroneous posts as long as you want mate.

Sorry for preaching. Consider it as a little Sauvignon-Blanc-induced Zen for a Friday.

Cheers big ears.

 

[mudlark]

Wrong, Farmer has figured out the program. However, as demonstrated over-and-over again, it IS NOT a scientifically accurate program for forensic purposes.

For forensics, AutoCAD or Solidworks is required because they are designed for such purposes. Maya is a graphics package for animation and film making. And yes, I can use both AutoCAD and Solidworks. I work the math because it is empirical and objective. Software packages such as Maya are subjective, based on the whims of the animator. For example, the crazy flight path simulations done by P4T. The math does not check with the animation results.

FYI:

I don't base my conclusions on cartoons. I will not waste my time making one to counter P4T. I have better uses for my time. But if Rob wants to send me his complete Maya scene then I'll be happy to go over his values.

Pfft..you KNOW that is bunk BCR.
I´ve been told that you don´t know how to use the program to its full capacity. Especially regarding lighting and shadows.

The Maya program as you well know is used in extremely complex calculations for dynamic collisions, add gravity, wind, etc.

It is discussed here:

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=19610

Look at some of the images Pilots have made available using this program

NOTE the reflecion of the Navy Annex on the fuselage of the plane.

Casting shadows using the azimuth of the sun at any given time

You want Rob to give you the values? They are there for you to see in Warren´s decode.

How to produce these images:

http://wiki.bk.tudelft.nl/toi-pedia/MR_Using_the_Physical_Sun_and_Sky_environment

You already know the data on the azimuth on September 11 2001.

 

[mudlark]

You support lies, and the math proves all the paths you have for NoC are not possible. Which is the path? Got RADAR for your path?

You said there was a tilt, what is turn radius of the tilt that the FDR supports? Any math or physics?

Madelyn Zachem described a ´tilt´.

The math has been provided over and over by me.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=15930

 

[mudlark]

Is that a gif of how you got your head injury?

Here muddy, Here is your problem drawn directly across your "wingspan"

[qimg]http://i294.photobucket.com/albums/mm89/AWSmith1955/sheratonpaikmisspath.jpg[/qimg]

You´re being a pain now (or are you actually serious??)
Paik described the plane as going over his roof because he could only see the right wing.
You are arguing over a couple of metres margin of error in the full knowledge that no matter how you try and twist it, Paik clearly describes an NOC path both in CIT´s interview AND in Larson´s.

The wingspan of 128ft is drawn to scale on that image. It could fly past the Sheraton.

Whether it flew directly over his roof or across his yard it is NOC.

 

[mudlark]

Ignore? But, but, but, I just learned that they are using Maya, freaking animation software out of all of the products currently on the market, to prove their point. They are finally talking about something I have a bit of expertise in.

(And I am willing to prove my expertise via PM, not publically as I do not need a bunch of nutbars flooding my inbox.)

If you know how to use Maya prove the images posted wrong.
IF you had any ´expertise´ on this program you would know how highly accurate it is.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autodesk_Maya

In 2003, Maya (then owned by Alias|Wavefront) won an Academy Award "for scientific and technical achievement", citing use "on nearly every feature using 3-D computer-generated images."[

MODELLING

NURBS, polygons and subdivision surfaces (or SubDivs or SubD's) are available in Maya.

Polygons are a widely used model medium due to its relative stability and functionality. Polygons are also the visualization bridge between NURBS and SubDivs. NURBS are used for their ready-smooth appearance and respond well to deformations in the Dynamics Workbench. SubDivs resemble a combination of both NURBS and polygons, but they are actually just a smoothed mesh[6]. They are ready-smooth and can be manipulated like polygons, resulting in a model of many objects including hands, faces, and other multi-topological constructions.

Non-uniform rational basis spline (NURBS) is a mathematical model commonly used in computer graphics for generating and representing curves and surfaces which offers great flexibility and precision for handling both analytic and freeform shapes

http://freeartsoftware.com/

Autodesk software is known as the premier industrial design tool – used by virtually every car, design, and consumer product companies around the world.

Their Pdf description

http://images.autodesk.com/adsk/files/maya_2010_product_brochure_us.pdf

Features
Maya has been at the cutting edge of feature
development for over 10 years, and Maya 2010 is no
exception. The software is packed with tried and
tested features that help speed your project from
initial concept to finished renderings: polygon and
NURBS modeling, UV mapping and texturing,
animation and rigging, dynamic simulation tools,
tools for generating plants and other natural detail,
in addition to advanced compositing capabilities,
and a choice of four built-in renderers

Performance
Through a combination of multi-threading, algorithmic
tuning, sophisticated memory management, and
tools for segmenting scenes, Maya 2010 is engineered
to elegantly handle today’s increasingly complex
data sets without restricting the creative process.

Are you seriously trying to tell me that this program is NOT capable of casting an accurate shadow based on a simple set of data points (azimuth)
on an engineered topographically exact area as Pilotsfor911truth have done in the images i have posted? Seriously?

Can´t wait to see the results.