Need debunk for Pentagon FDR. Thanks.

How many active members (same person with multiple accounts does not count) does his TROOF site have now? 10, 11, maybe 12?
 
weedwacker said:
Wow, they're all coming out of the woodwork. It's like a gang rape. I can only imagine if JDX tried to come over here. Post after post saying "You're wrong". haha.

The data is there. AS, you said yourself you are not an expert. I'm just quoting you.

The data does show the aircraft too high to hit the light poles. The G forces do not show this aircraft pulling out of the dive. If there was any altimeter lag, you have to account for increased descent rate. JDX might be an ass to you people (I'm starting to see why, I haven't done anything and I'm being treated like crap), but his calculations make sense based on the data.

I'm thinking the data may be fake. If it is, the NTSB/FBI has a real problem.


Good day all.
Click to expand...

http://dtrs.dfrc.nasa.gov/archive/00000221/01/104316.pdf

I think you should take a closer look into the calibration perimeters of the aircraft, if fighter jets have problems with altimeter readings at low altitude at high speeds then what happens to commercial aircraft?
 
Poor Russell's adventures in JDX world.

JDX,

Hey I have an idea.

Would you be willing to allow 2 JREFer's limited access to a debate thread with you on the FDR data?

Some of us here just don't get exposed to a second opinion on this stuff.

When you compared me to them and suggested I go over there, I did some reading. Some of them appear to be employed in the aerospace industry and pretty knowledgeable.

They have some ideas and formulas that indicate some different conclusions that seem reasonable.

As you've pointed out I am not that bright at this aerospace stuff and a couple of others have been told they don't know what they're talking about either. Since those of us here are not exposed to this stuff much, I thought it might help us understand the issues better.

We would know who they are and that they are taking the position of skeptics in advance. They would also only have limited access to the debate thread and would not "troll" the boards.

It seems like a good idea and with the facts you would be able to convince them of your interpretation of the data putting this all to rest.

Would you be open to doing that?

Is anybody else interested in seeing an open discussion like this? The truth has nothing to fear.

Russell
Click to expand...

JDX then goes on a tirade! Facing none of RP's ideas!
 
StoneWT said:
How many active members (same person with multiple accounts does not count) does his TROOF site have now? 10, 11, maybe 12?
Click to expand...
He claims to have 50 aviation experts (30 of which are pilots) in his Pilots for Truth organization. That was a while ago though, and as he claims more and more people are joining, it should probably be closer to 80 now! You'd think some of them would make the occasional post on his forum, but the only people posting there seems to be him and a couple of "laymen" from the Loose Change forum.
 
Russell Pickering @ LC said:
JDX,

Hey I have an idea.

Would you be willing to allow 2 JREFer's limited access to a debate thread with you on the FDR data?

Some of us here just don't get exposed to a second opinion on this stuff.

When you compared me to them and suggested I go over there, I did some reading. Some of them appear to be employed in the aerospace industry and pretty knowledgeable.

They have some ideas and formulas that indicate some different conclusions that seem reasonable.

As you've pointed out I am not that bright at this aerospace stuff and a couple of others have been told they don't know what they're talking about either. Since those of us here are not exposed to this stuff much, I thought it might help us understand the issues better.

We would know who they are and that they are taking the position of skeptics in advance. They would also only have limited access to the debate thread and would not "troll" the boards.

It seems like a good idea and with the facts you would be able to convince them of your interpretation of the data putting this all to rest.

Would you be open to doing that?

Is anybody else interested in seeing an open discussion like this? The truth has nothing to fear.

Russell
Click to expand...

This appears to have been deleted on the LC boards already. The truth may not have anything to fear, but apparently the TROOF does.
 
Huntsman said:
We should extend an invite to Russell, if no one has yet. Unlike many of the "troofers", he actually does seem interested in investigating, rather than confirming a foregone conclusion.
Click to expand...
Sort of. He believes a version of CT that the plane that hit the Pentagon was remote controlled. But I agree, he is open to actual evidence changing his mind. He's gone from a no plane hit the Pentagon to remote contolled plane. He's a CTist at heart, but he's got a brain and he does allow his brain to overturn his heart.

He's unique in that respect at LC.
 
Russell Pickering continues his quest for a open discussion in the " Official Story Officially Debunked, Better than any witness or FDR" thread in the Pentagon forum.

JDX continues his dodge and weave. (Run away little johnny, run away)
 
Just posted in the (irony alert) "Open Discussion Suggestion" forum

Adolf Sanders said:
I just banned Anti-sophist. For being an admitted JREFer. JREFers are not welcome on this forum.

I repeat, JREFers are not welcome here.

Anyone who talks on their forum about alerting the FBI, NSA, CIA to the LC forum in hope of shutting this place down and seeing some of us killed (yes, they really were talking about that over there), or anyone that associates with people of that mind-set, are not welcome here. Period. In case anyone didn't get the memo.

JREFers will be banned on sight. As I just did. We welcome skeptics, but not JREFers.

Thank you all for your consideration.
Click to expand...

asshat.

Nice job JDX - Did you get Sanders to do your dirty work?
 
Last edited:
http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=16466

Haha, that has to be a new record.

Here, in it's entirity, is my post:

Hi, my name is Anti-sophist.

I worked as an instrumentation engineer with the USAF (as a civilian). I'll be happy to look at your calculations in detail (I've already done so, repeatedly, in a shallow respect), and give you my honest evaluation. For the sake of full disclosure: I am a "skeptic" by every definition of the word, and a JREFer by you all's definition. However, none of those affiliations are paramount to my role as an engineer or scientist. I draw conclusions based on the evidence, and if the evidence changes, so will my conclusions. I consider my "skepticism" to be the the result of looking at the evidence, not the bias I bring to its analysis. You'll need to judge my honesty, for yourself, over time.

My only "rules" for any "debate" is that the goal is to get the science right, first, and draw conclusions last. Also, the debate needs to be about the science, and intellectually honest. I'm not in the business of sophistry or propaganda... getting the science right is all that should matter. Under those conditions, I'm willing to participate in any debate and/or discussion.

My expertise has to do with data aquisition systems, pcm data, and recording/telemetry devices. I've worked with tape and solid-state recorders, although never "crash survivable" ones. I do not claim to be an expert on issues like "pressure altitude" sensors and its calibration with respect to air speeds and lag and all that other stuff. That wasn't my business. My business was, very specifically, in reading data from instruments, storing the data returned, and telemetry. As such, any error related to the instrument must be dealt with post-decoding of the PCM data.

As such, I'm willing to discuss, specifically the FDR data. The CSV file released by the NTSB is the only data I have in possession. I understand there is also a '.fdr' file floating around which may contain raw data. If someone could provide me a link to that, I'd be happy to download that. Furthermore, does there exist, anywhere, the major-frame description of this raw data?
Click to expand...

Banned. Who is afraid of the truth now?
 
Would you be willing to do the same thing at JDX's forum? At least there it would be obvious that it was his ax doing the dirty work.
Click to expand...

Maybe. However, it took him not 10 minutes to attack my credibility based on absolutely no evidence, as soon as I was gone. Feel free to read my posts, and his response, which is basically an attack on me personally.

They have severe misunderstandings on how FDR data is collected, buffered, and recorded into a PCM stream, and I was perfectly willing to teach them the inner workings in order to more accurately interpret the CSV file... but, alas... "truth" strikes again.
 
Anti-sophist said:
Maybe. However, it took him not 10 minutes to attack my credibility based on absolutely no evidence, as soon as I was gone. Feel free to read my posts, and his response, which is basically an attack on me personally.

They have severe misunderstandings on how FDR data is collected, buffered, and recorded into a PCM stream, and I was perfectly willing to teach them the inner workings in order to more accurately interpret the CSV file... but, alas... "truth" strikes again.
Click to expand...
I read all the posts, you were civil, polite and professional. JDX is an immature idiot, that goes without saying and I'm betting he had Sanders ban you before you embarrassed him further. I'm guessing though, he would never even let you register at his forum. Then deny or ignore any comments about it.
 
Anti-sophist said:
Maybe. However, it took him not 10 minutes to attack my credibility based on absolutely no evidence, as soon as I was gone. Feel free to read my posts, and his response, which is basically an attack on me personally.

They have severe misunderstandings on how FDR data is collected, buffered, and recorded into a PCM stream, and I was perfectly willing to teach them the inner workings in order to more accurately interpret the CSV file... but, alas... "truth" strikes again.
Click to expand...

You did good for the brief time you were over there :) .

Getting the admins to behave that poorly that quickly is probably a much more effective "debunk" than the debate in which you were prepared to engage.
 
Anti-sophist said:
http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=16466

Haha, that has to be a new record.

Here, in it's entirity, is my post:

[...]

Banned. Who is afraid of the truth now?
Click to expand...

Actually, I think the Loosers have banned people who haven't even gotten a single post off, so I don't think you set the record. Sorry.

Anyway, this all goes to show quite clearly why the "challenge" issued is bunk. They control the field, they have a track record of juvenility when it comes to conversation. There's absolutely nothing for us to gain.

I sympathize with Russell Pickering. While I admit he and I will probably differ wildly on some other aspects of Sept. 11th, his requests for a more intelligent discussion over there, along with his reasons why, are spot on. The whole reason the Loose Change forum is a joke is because they only allow particularly rabid, self-reinforcing viewpoints. Pilots for Trooth is a joke because there's nobody there.

Banning indiscriminately does not improve one's arguments.

John Doe X also needs to understand that it doesn't really matter to us -- to me, anyway -- whether or not we can convince him. His stubbornness is completely out of our control.

All I want, as an honest researcher, is to say to myself, without any self-deception, that I have fairly considered all scientific viewpoints, and I have come up with the most accurate theory that I can. In this vein, I have considered John Doe X's arguments, and rejected them, for a variety of fundamental mathematical and physical reasons. It's up to him to do better. It's not up to me to seek him out in his lair. I've got what I want.

So unless he poses a real challenge -- an intellectual challenge -- he can have his loony opinions. Baiting us to debate on his forum, under his rules, is simply asinine.
 
Looks like JDX is coming out of the CT closet reguarding the Pentagon:
johndoeX said:
A bombing run is something of my personal opinon when i take ALL the facts into consideration. The physical damage and FDR. (Combined with the fact i have flown sims on many bombing engagements using CCIP). I rarely share it publicly.
Click to expand...
 
Russ started a thread titled: "Flight Path Submission, for criticism and review."

Great reading, not for his analysis, but for the cat fight between him and JDX. Looks like JDX is reading emails sent to Russ via the website. JDX is one amazing paranoid looser.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom