CIT Fraud Revealed

leftysergeant said:
The stupid in that link just burned my corneas. The mush-brained twit does not even try to defend his assertion from the shadow evidence. Whadda marooooon!
Click to expand...
That's the beauty of being CIT, you can pick and choose what you want to believe and everyone (In their minds) thinks your right. :rolleyes:
 
Paik needs to enter the olympics as a runner

I have to laugh. When confronted with Morin's testimony that he watched the tail of flight 77 dip as it headed toward the pentagon. The argument touted by the Citizens Ignorance Team is that Morin couldn't possibly have witnessed that because he was 10 feet within the annex wings when he first became aware of the noise of the plane. But we are to accept without question the flight path drawn by Edward Paik who was surrounded by the four walls and ceiling of a tiny service station office. His only view was a brief shadow from this window.

paikwindowf.jpg


Yet through this window. CIT gets and promotes this path

CITGO2.jpg
 
Last edited:
A W Smith said:
its been quite a few days and we haven't had a wall of posts from our buddy Muddy, Is the show over?
Click to expand...
It is possible mudlark gained knowledge and skill to do math to see all the flight paths of CIT are impossible based on CIT's own work.

mudlark scavenging in the CIT river of stupid, came up with no items of value.
 
Oh Hai!

I'm guessing that Mudlark has been tasked by the CIT overlords with a significantly more important job.

Which does not include releasing the ****ing actual raw video that the mutts are basing their idiotic theory on.

Great job morans.
 
I'm still waiting to report my actions to citizen investigation team but unfortunately that part of the website hasn't been setup yet. It's only been 9 months.

I'm sure those whopping 735 page views per day made all those trips to Arlington worth the effort. This whole "project" paid for itself, didn't it. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Perhaps agents of the entity responsible for this deception have finally caught up with him. Afterall, such powerful beings wouldn't be letting pions like CIT run around revealing their carefully executed plans.
 
That's a theory I can believe. Maybe the establishment also genetically engineered the world's biggest Adam's Apple and put it in Ranke's throat because that is one massive gullet.

27494498bdfdb97b42.jpg
 
Last edited:
GlennB said:
To the advantage of CIT theory, you choose the gentlest turn that is reasonably consistent with the several yellow NoC paths we see on the CIT graphics.

Choose a min and max speed then see how it looks, it's only two inputs to the bank-angle calculator after all. About 2 minutes effort. I'd suggest 300mph and 500mph, but the joy of this little exercise is you get to see how different parameters affect the bank angle.

Here is the calculator.
Click to expand...

Childlike Empress said:
I'm not stupid, Glenn. If you want to present an argument, flesh it out. I don't need you to tell me math - based on speculation.
Click to expand...

Come on CE, the request is quite simple really.

Given the flightpaths that the CiT promotes as being representative of the descriptions offered by the people they interviewed find a path that is
a) consistent with those interview based flightpaths
b) subsonic
c) consistent with the descriptions of the eyewitnesses('fast', 'engines screaming', large twin engined aircraft etc..)
d) capable of being flown by aircraft obeying the known characteristics of flight.
e) which ends up within 25 feet of the roof of the Pentagon vertically(slightly more than the height of the fuselage), and within 100 feet laterally of the impact area(approx one wingspan)

So for instance a flight path that requires the aircraft in question to bank at an angle greater than say, 15 degrees for more than half a second or which would have to be at a speed of less than 120 mph (which looks positively pokey from the ground) would not be consistent with the descriptions of the aircraft even if the path is consistent with them.

Neither would opining that we, 'don't know what technonlogy [/i][/b]they[/b][/i] have' in order to have some type of craft follow a path. (Which I refer to as invoking magic)
 
Last edited:
jaydeehess said:
Come on CE, the request is quite simple really.

Given the flightpaths that the CiT promotes as being representative of the descriptions offered by the people they interviewed find a path that is
a) consistent with those interview based flightpaths
b) subsonic
c) consistent with the descriptions of the eyewitnesses('fast', 'engines screaming', large twin engined aircraft etc..)
d) capable of being flown by aircraft obeying the known characteristics of flight.
e) which ends up within 25 feet of the roof of the Pentagon vertically(slightly more than the height of the fuselage), and within 100 feet laterally of the impact area(approx one wingspan)

So for instance a flight path that requires the aircraft in question to bank at an angle greater than say, 15 degrees for more than half a second or which would have to be at a speed of less than 120 mph (which looks positively pokey from the ground) would not be consistent with the descriptions of the aircraft even if the path is consistent with them.
Click to expand...

I don't think Childlike Empress was too happy at the prospect of doing 5 minutes work. Work that would have fatally undermined her/his delusion.
 
GlennB said:
I don't think Childlike Empress was too happy at the prospect of doing 5 minutes work. Work that would have fatally undermined her/his delusion.
Click to expand...

Oh, I understand that perfectly.

CE is making excuses not to to the work rather than simply admitting incompetance in doing such work or, if that is incorrect, not doing it because it is obvious that it would nullify the CiT contentions in that it would require a steep bank that no witness has described.
 
Last edited:
Okay, the last I noted, the claim by those defending CIT is that their work was incompetent, not fraudulent. Is that where everything stands at the moment? CE and mudlap have been conspicuously missing for several days now.
 
BCR said:
Okay, the last I noted, the claim by those defending CIT is that their work was incompetent, not fraudulent. Is that where everything stands at the moment? CE and mudlap have been conspicuously missing for several days now.
Click to expand...

I'd go along with the redefinition from fraudulent to incompetant. It also absloves the CiT from nefarious intent and instead simply makes them buffoons. Much nicer than accusations of deliberate fraud, but hey, I'm Canadian that's the way we are. (nice that is! :D )
 
BCR said:
Okay, the last I noted, the claim by those defending CIT is that their work was incompetent, not fraudulent. Is that where everything stands at the moment? CE and mudlap have been conspicuously missing for several days now.
Click to expand...

Well,, Its getting pretty close to Valentines day. Maybe their on a cruise or shopping for chocolates?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom