Jim Ritter & The Ntsb Animation

rearnakedchoke said:
The NTSB says the impact is at 09:37:45 as signed by Jim Ritter (Chief of Vehicle Performance) in the Flight Path Study.
1. Does the NTSB animation show the aircraft too high to hit the light poles at 09:37:44.. yes or no.
Click to expand...

In the animation, as the animation was constructed it shows the pressure altitude as something a fair amount greater than the altitude above ground level.

2. Does the csv file provided by the NTSB show the aircraft too high to hit the light poles at 09:37:44 .yes or no...
Click to expand...

If the clock running on the animation is correct then yes it does but only if that clock is in perfect co-ordination with ground based clocks and once again, the pressure altitude is indeed the same as AGL.

3. If trends are continued based on vertical speed in the csv file or animation through 09:37:45, will the aircraft hit the pentagon.. yes or no.
Click to expand...

If the animation was a perfect representation of the flight path of the aircraft, no. It isn't.

4. The raw data JDX claims to be decoded showing 273 feet Radar Altitude at 09:37:47, is that to high to hit the pentagon.. yes or no.
Click to expand...

What is the radar reflecting off of? Is the timing of the radar altitude record matched to the clock or is there a lag?

5. Does the flight path shown in the animation corroborate with pentagon police officers at the Citgo Gas station... yes or no...
Click to expand...

See beachnut's post above.

6. Have any of you emailed JDX to set up a time/date for proper debate? Yes or no...
Click to expand...


JDX's version of a "proper" debate is in error. A technical subject such as this simply cannot be properly discussed in a strictly audio format. It would simply turn into a "I'm right/No you aren't" debacle and that's all it seems that JDX desires.

Just answer YES OR NO... do not want excuses.. or 'possible error'. Just YES OR NO!
just as would be in a court of law
Click to expand...

In a court of law a witness can indeed expand on an answer. If the prosecution asks for a strict yes/no the defence can cross examine and ask the witness to express themselves. You watch too much TV law shows.

BTW!
did anyone see that John Lear. .Son Of the Learjet" is with P4T now?http://z9.invisionfree.com/Pilots_For_Trut...?showtopic=5394
Click to expand...

I am Chuck Yeager. I trump John Lear.
 
jaydeehess said:
In a court of law a witness can indeed expand on an answer. If the prosecution asks for a strict yes/no the defence can cross examine and ask the witness to express themselves. You watch too much TV law shows.
Click to expand...
I think they don't even have to wait that long. If the prosecution called the witness, the defense can call an objection: leading the witness.
 
rearnakedchoke said:
no need for debate, ive seen russell pickerings sight, and why a debate? isnt everything i need to know in the unbiased 9/11 commissions report?
Click to expand...

I take it that's your way of saying, "No gravy, I'd get slaughtered in a debate against you so I'm gonna decline."
 
Gravy said:
Have I mentioned in what low regard I hold people who lie about 9/11 and then run away? Can't they pick another subject to lie about? How about Spain? Why don't they lie about Spain?
Click to expand...

Aw, come on...everyone knows Spain doesn't exist. What do you take these twoofers for, idiots or something?
 
rearnakedchoke said:
BTW!
did anyone see that John Lear. .Son Of the Learjet" is with P4T now?http://z9.invisionfree.com/Pilots_For_Trut...?showtopic=5394
Click to expand...


Yes, I just heard of this a couple weeks ago when little Billy Giltner posted it on Screw Loose Change.

This, by the way, is the same John Lear who has spent his adult life writing himself into every insane conspiracy theory that has come along and has claimed to have stolen parts of extra-terrestrial spacecraft from Area 51. He also claims to have inside knowledge of full blown firefights breaking out between US special forces and the alien residents of Area 51.

A frustrated son trying to step out of a famous fathers shadow, driven to making up stories about having Stargate: SG-1 style adventures is the perfect partner-in-crime for the fraudulent pseudo-pilot JDX.
 
rearnakedchoke said:
no need for debate, ive seen russell pickerings sight, and why a debate? isnt everything i need to know in the unbiased 9/11 commissions report?
Click to expand...

You asked if anyone had responded to Balsamo's debate challenge.

I said yes: in fact I challenge any P4T member to a debate, including you.

Then you said there's no need for a debate.

Care to explain why your position changed in one day?
 
DarkMagician said:
I think they don't even have to wait that long. If the prosecution called the witness, the defense can call an objection: leading the witness.
Click to expand...

You are right about not having to wait that long (because a demand by the lawyer conducting the questioning that a witness answer only "yes" or "no" is quite improper) but the objection would not be that such a demand is a leading question. Such a demand is not a leading question but it is an improper question, and the objection would be that it is an improper question because the witness is entitled to make a complete response to the questions asked.
 
Sword_Of_Truth said:
Yes, I just heard of this a couple weeks ago when little Billy Giltner posted it on Screw Loose Change.

This, by the way, is the same John Lear who has spent his adult life writing himself into every insane conspiracy theory that has come along and has claimed to have stolen parts of extra-terrestrial spacecraft from Area 51. He also claims to have inside knowledge of full blown firefights breaking out between US special forces and the alien residents of Area 51.

A frustrated son trying to step out of a famous fathers shadow, driven to making up stories about having Stargate: SG-1 style adventures is the perfect partner-in-crime for the fraudulent pseudo-pilot JDX.
Click to expand...
No John Lear is not crazy like JDX!
Since 1938 we've lost over 200 aircraft due to UFO hostilities and thousands of soldiers in all kinds of different actions with aliens. Since that time several hundred thousand civilians have disappeared with no trace. Several thousand of those were eliminated by us because of their chance encounters with the aliens which we could ill afford to have publicized.
Click to expand...
How do these idiots find each other. Do the mindless follower ever check anything out. For two pilots Chemtrails have got them. They forgot to wear their FAA approved Chemtail mask during flight.

JDX and his mindless followers, and nut case pilots. How did the aliens fail to get JDX and John?
 
Last edited:
The whole reason I ended up in this forum was because of John Lear.. I was listening to Coast to Coast one night, and he was on talking about new evidence of strip mining operations on the moon! That had been going on since the 60's. He went on and on about how we had actually been to the moon in 1963 or something, and that today we have something like 9 bases throughout the solar system. It was all crazy. I can't remember it all, but it was just all crazy.

I went to a web page with this startling "evidence" only to find that they were looking at old, blurry pictures from some early moon pictures (from the 60's), and seeing this evidence in the form of shadows and rocks. It was a Rorschach Test at best. There was *nothing* even remotely convincing. Yet there were dozens of people who all "saw" what he could see, and were posting endless streams of images that they had modified to make it easier to see, by coloring the areas in question, doing gamma adjustments, etc.

Reading those sites led me from one CT site to another, to another, till somehow I found my way here. And I'm glad I did.
 
LashL said:
You are right about not having to wait that long (because a demand by the lawyer conducting the questioning that a witness answer only "yes" or "no" is quite improper) but the objection would not be that such a demand is a leading question. Such a demand is not a leading question but it is an improper question, and the objection would be that it is an improper question because the witness is entitled to make a complete response to the questions asked.
Click to expand...

Ah, thanks. I was just pulling trivia out of my arse. Didn't know if it was accurate.
 
Whiplash said:
The whole reason I ended up in this forum was because of John Lear.. I was listening to Coast to Coast one night, and he was on talking about new evidence of strip mining operations on the moon! That had been going on since the 60's. He went on and on about how we had actually been to the moon in 1963 or something, and that today we have something like 9 bases throughout the solar system. It was all crazy. I can't remember it all, but it was just all crazy.

I went to a web page with this startling "evidence" only to find that they were looking at old, blurry pictures from some early moon pictures (from the 60's), and seeing this evidence in the form of shadows and rocks. It was a Rorschach Test at best. There was *nothing* even remotely convincing. Yet there were dozens of people who all "saw" what he could see, and were posting endless streams of images that they had modified to make it easier to see, by coloring the areas in question, doing gamma adjustments, etc.

Reading those sites led me from one CT site to another, to another, till somehow I found my way here. And I'm glad I did.
Click to expand...
You mean John Lear may have a few screws loose? He sounds like a great guy to help the PFT http://www.pilotsfor911truth.org/

I think he is over qualified to join JDX mindless quest.
We got 2 live aliens from Roswell. One died shortly there after and one lived till 1956. And we found out so far there are 18 different alien species that we know about monitoring Earth. Some are good and some are hostile, most are indifferent. We found out that we are the experimental product, if you will, of an alien race who we never met and we don't know who they are.
Click to expand...
How fast can you run for the exit when you hear, "I will be your captain, John Lear, your copilot is JDX"...
 
Last edited:
The answer to JDX's 10 stupid questions go like this...

"Does the animation show..."

Yes, JDX. The animation shows alot of things that when forensically analyzed seem wrong. This is solely proof that the animation is inadequate for forensic analysis. I find it curious that you don't ask what the CSV file says for the heading, though, and you only ask what the animation shows. I guess being intellectually honest isn't your strong point. It's curious that you ignore this glaring issue because it doesn't fit with your pre-decided conclusion.

"Does the CSV file show...."

No, JDX. It doesn't. None of the data in the CSV file can conclusively and in a statistically significant way make up any of the claims you've made regarding flight 77.

If a poll shows someone is winning 51-49% with a margin of error of +/- 3%, can I say that they won? No. I can't. I can't say anything.

JDX is trying to take a number and treat it as infinitely precise paying absolutely no attention, at all, to the confidence interval of the number, and completely ignoring the basic statistics that go along with data analysis.

If the CSV file says at 4:35:01 the altimeter read 275 feet, does that mean that at 4:35:01.00 the plane was at 275 feet? No. It doesn't. Both of those numbers have some (likely multi-order) probability distribution associated with them. And any claim that makes this assumption without any justification is gibberish. All of p4t's analysis make these ridiculous claims because they have absolutely no idea of the very basic statistics of data analysis.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom