Please Denounce the Whoppers:
An Open Letter to James Randi and the Skeptic Community
by John H. Morrison
(johnm 307 AT wind stream DOT net)
January 21, 2010
Why couldn't ATC find the hijacked flights? When
the hijackers turned off the planes' transponders,
which broadcast identifying signals, ATC had to
search 4500 identical radar blips crisscrossing
some of the country's busiest air corridors.
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html?page=3
At the time of the hijackings, there were 4,500
planes in the skies over the continental United
States. Without transponder data or radio
contact, controllers were forced to search for the
missing aircraft among all the identical radar
blips, with each controller responsible for
varying numbers of planes in his or her sector.
Dunbar, David & Brad Reagan, eds., Debunking 9/11 Myths:
Why Conspiracy Theories Can't Stand Up to the Facts, New
York: Hearst Books, 2006, p. 17.
--- Popular Mechanics
The FAA may have been tracking the progress of
United 93 on a display that showed its projected
path to Washington, not its actual radar return.
Thus, the Secret Service was relying on
projections and was not aware the plane was
already down in Pennsylvania.
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/911/pdf/sec1.pdf, p. 41.
--- The 9/11 Commission Report
With the first two quotes above, Popular Mechanics tells
us flat-out that ATC must search thousands of radar blips,
across the entire country, for a commercial aircraft that
has lost its transponder signal. Popular Mechanics has
thereby followed the the admonition, "If you tell a lie,
make it a whopper." (The third quote is discussed in the
second part of this letter.)
This admonition reflects the notion that one best gets
away with lying by boldly telling a humongous, transparent
falsehood. It may be difficult mentally to reject such an
enormous falsehood. Nevertheless, the sheer enormity of
the September 11, 2001 attacks and their consequences of
the past decade demand that the skeptic community, the
science community, and every person of integrity denounce
the major falsehoods.
It takes a commercial airplane literally hours to cross
the continental US. An aircraft flying halfway from New
York to California in five minutes is in orbit:
1500 miles/(1/12 hour) = 18,000 mph = orbital speed
An airplane flying 600 mph can travel at most ten miles
each minute it's gone from ATC's view. At 450 mph, the
airplane can travel only 7.5 miles each minute. ATC would
limit its search to a region attainable in the time
elapsed --- a far smaller region with only ten or twenty
aircraft.
A second idiocy is inherent in Popular Mechanics's claim:
the notion that ATC can't distinguish an aircraft without
a transponder signal among aircraft with transponder
signals. If several airplanes are within the search
region, and all but one transmit transponder signals, that
remaining aircraft is the wayward aircraft.
It is silly to suggest that ATC could be foiled by simply
turning off a transponder. A rogue airplane flying
through the country's busiest air corridors is a disaster
waiting to occur. ATC (with half a century experience)
would have procedures for identifying, tracking, and
responding to such a rogue airplane.
Note Popular Mechanics's propaganda technique: they
attempt to preempt the obvious argument (made in the
previous paragraph) by refering to aircraft "crisscrossing
some of the country's busiest air corridors." But this
quote is given as a reason for ATC's inability to track a
wayward aircraft, rather than as a reason to rapidly
locate and track the wayward aircraft.
In fact, controllers claimed to have tracked American
Airlines Flight 11 all the way to its crash into the North
Tower without the benefit of the transponder.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2001/0913/p1s2-usju.html
http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=130125&page=1
The Popular Mechanics quotes are in the sections of the
article and the book titled, "No Stand-Down Order." Those
sections pretend to to explain why NORAD never set fighter
jets to intercept or even approach any of the hijacked
aircraft. Popular Mechanics is treated and cited as a
major authority in defense of the official story. With
claims like these, Popular Mechanics's discussion of 9/11
requires careful skeptical scrutiny, if not outright
rejection as blatant propaganda.
The Second Whopper
The third quote opening this article, from the first
chapter of the 9/11 Commission Report, attempts to explain
how the FAA could report to the Secret Service the
approach of an airplane 80 miles away (then 60 miles away
at least two minutes later), when in fact the airplane had
crashed 150 miles away.
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/911/pdf/sec1.pdf, p. 41.
The evidence for the alleged projection consists solely of
an April 8, 2004 interview with Tim Grovac (misspelled
"Tim Grovack").
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/911/pdf/notes.pdf, p. 464, Note 217.
Handwritten notes of the interview have been released:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/13484935/...vac-Fdr-41804-Interview-Handwritten-Notes-039
I have not found anything in the handwritten notes about
aircraft trajectory projections. The Commission did not
cite any actual FAA records or controller testimony about
an actual projection of Flight 93's path.
The projection would have continued at least nine minutes
after the crash in the Commission's account. The
Commission's use of the phrase "may have" reflects only
the minimal evidence (zero verifiable evidence) in support
of such a monstrous claim, and the Commission's
disinclination to investigate the claim.
These are but two examples of lies, propaganda, and
incompetence in the official story, or told by allegedly
credible authorities in defense of the official story. I
have sent you (James Randi) many examples in private
correspondence. The truth of 9/11 cannot stand lies,
incompetence, and propaganda.
Please Publicly Denounce the Whoppers!
An Open Letter to James Randi and the Skeptic Community
by John H. Morrison
(johnm 307 AT wind stream DOT net)
January 21, 2010
Why couldn't ATC find the hijacked flights? When
the hijackers turned off the planes' transponders,
which broadcast identifying signals, ATC had to
search 4500 identical radar blips crisscrossing
some of the country's busiest air corridors.
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html?page=3
At the time of the hijackings, there were 4,500
planes in the skies over the continental United
States. Without transponder data or radio
contact, controllers were forced to search for the
missing aircraft among all the identical radar
blips, with each controller responsible for
varying numbers of planes in his or her sector.
Dunbar, David & Brad Reagan, eds., Debunking 9/11 Myths:
Why Conspiracy Theories Can't Stand Up to the Facts, New
York: Hearst Books, 2006, p. 17.
--- Popular Mechanics
The FAA may have been tracking the progress of
United 93 on a display that showed its projected
path to Washington, not its actual radar return.
Thus, the Secret Service was relying on
projections and was not aware the plane was
already down in Pennsylvania.
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/911/pdf/sec1.pdf, p. 41.
--- The 9/11 Commission Report
With the first two quotes above, Popular Mechanics tells
us flat-out that ATC must search thousands of radar blips,
across the entire country, for a commercial aircraft that
has lost its transponder signal. Popular Mechanics has
thereby followed the the admonition, "If you tell a lie,
make it a whopper." (The third quote is discussed in the
second part of this letter.)
This admonition reflects the notion that one best gets
away with lying by boldly telling a humongous, transparent
falsehood. It may be difficult mentally to reject such an
enormous falsehood. Nevertheless, the sheer enormity of
the September 11, 2001 attacks and their consequences of
the past decade demand that the skeptic community, the
science community, and every person of integrity denounce
the major falsehoods.
It takes a commercial airplane literally hours to cross
the continental US. An aircraft flying halfway from New
York to California in five minutes is in orbit:
1500 miles/(1/12 hour) = 18,000 mph = orbital speed
An airplane flying 600 mph can travel at most ten miles
each minute it's gone from ATC's view. At 450 mph, the
airplane can travel only 7.5 miles each minute. ATC would
limit its search to a region attainable in the time
elapsed --- a far smaller region with only ten or twenty
aircraft.
A second idiocy is inherent in Popular Mechanics's claim:
the notion that ATC can't distinguish an aircraft without
a transponder signal among aircraft with transponder
signals. If several airplanes are within the search
region, and all but one transmit transponder signals, that
remaining aircraft is the wayward aircraft.
It is silly to suggest that ATC could be foiled by simply
turning off a transponder. A rogue airplane flying
through the country's busiest air corridors is a disaster
waiting to occur. ATC (with half a century experience)
would have procedures for identifying, tracking, and
responding to such a rogue airplane.
Note Popular Mechanics's propaganda technique: they
attempt to preempt the obvious argument (made in the
previous paragraph) by refering to aircraft "crisscrossing
some of the country's busiest air corridors." But this
quote is given as a reason for ATC's inability to track a
wayward aircraft, rather than as a reason to rapidly
locate and track the wayward aircraft.
In fact, controllers claimed to have tracked American
Airlines Flight 11 all the way to its crash into the North
Tower without the benefit of the transponder.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2001/0913/p1s2-usju.html
http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=130125&page=1
The Popular Mechanics quotes are in the sections of the
article and the book titled, "No Stand-Down Order." Those
sections pretend to to explain why NORAD never set fighter
jets to intercept or even approach any of the hijacked
aircraft. Popular Mechanics is treated and cited as a
major authority in defense of the official story. With
claims like these, Popular Mechanics's discussion of 9/11
requires careful skeptical scrutiny, if not outright
rejection as blatant propaganda.
The Second Whopper
The third quote opening this article, from the first
chapter of the 9/11 Commission Report, attempts to explain
how the FAA could report to the Secret Service the
approach of an airplane 80 miles away (then 60 miles away
at least two minutes later), when in fact the airplane had
crashed 150 miles away.
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/911/pdf/sec1.pdf, p. 41.
The evidence for the alleged projection consists solely of
an April 8, 2004 interview with Tim Grovac (misspelled
"Tim Grovack").
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/911/pdf/notes.pdf, p. 464, Note 217.
Handwritten notes of the interview have been released:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/13484935/...vac-Fdr-41804-Interview-Handwritten-Notes-039
I have not found anything in the handwritten notes about
aircraft trajectory projections. The Commission did not
cite any actual FAA records or controller testimony about
an actual projection of Flight 93's path.
The projection would have continued at least nine minutes
after the crash in the Commission's account. The
Commission's use of the phrase "may have" reflects only
the minimal evidence (zero verifiable evidence) in support
of such a monstrous claim, and the Commission's
disinclination to investigate the claim.
These are but two examples of lies, propaganda, and
incompetence in the official story, or told by allegedly
credible authorities in defense of the official story. I
have sent you (James Randi) many examples in private
correspondence. The truth of 9/11 cannot stand lies,
incompetence, and propaganda.
Please Publicly Denounce the Whoppers!
