Put Options too coincidental?

[ktesibios]

Er... explain? Are you saying the Memphis Belle wasn't a B-17, or that the B-17 wasn't designed by a team of engineers from the Boeing aircraft company?

-Gumboot

I think he's referring to the '92 movie by that name, which did take a lot of liberties with the real story of the Belle.

William Wyler's wartime documentary is the first thing you want to watch, then, after doing some reading about the B-17 (Edward Jablonski's book is exceelent if you can find a copy), you're all set to watch the Hollywood movie and play a game of "spot the historical/technical inaccuracies" while enjoying the aerial photography.

 

[JamesB]

I briefly exchanged e-mail with Professor Poteshman, and did a post on SLC on the paper earlier.

http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2006/10/911-theory-published-in-journal.html

While I believe he is a serious academic and it is a pretty good paper, I still have some problems with it. Essentially he is saying that the trades (he only examines UAL and AMR) are in the 96th percentile in his way of measuring put option volume. Otherwise, it is in the top 4-5% of occurrence. Based on this he concludes it is likely the trades involved foreknowledge.

This of course cannot prove anything specific though, it could just be pure random chance, basically a 1 in 20 of occurrence. The biggest problem I had with the paper is he essentially self selects the data to read. He picks 3 measurements, but then discards one, because it didn't show a higher occurrence. Well, then he is basically cherry picking numbers that fit his hypothesis.

You will never see this paper mention among the CTs much, except for LIHOP, because his entire thesis is based opon Osama bin Laden knowing about the attacks 5 days beforehand, so he only looks at the trading on those two stocks during just this period. Obviously the Illuminati/NWO could have carried out a much more lucrative and harder to detect fraud over a longer period of time.

This brings up another issue I had with the paper, he only measures the maximum trade volume during that 5 day period. I asked him in e-mail, why he didn't measure the average volume over that period instead. He answered that because it didn't show anything. Once again, indicating he is cherry picking data to a certain extent.

 

[eeyore1954]

Puts and calls on many stocks are thinly traded and so it is not usual to see large swings in volume.

FORD MTR CO DEL COM PAR $0.01 JAN 20, 2007 $ 10.000 PUT

https://www.etrade.wallst.com/v1/st...Hn3HFpxNJpGzABxcniNZZ+QDBGhj9QwlmqtL9a6sbRp7/

I tried to get this graph into the post but was unable but if you go to the link you will see big swings in volume.

This was just an option I picked sort of at random . The very first put I graphed showed these volume swings. This is from a current option due to expire in a few weeks. Not some world record for option volume.

 

[Horatius]

That's item 4: Tendency to discredit, rather than investigate.

We should start a separate thread - how many of these 28th commits in one day, and how many times he does it. Let's see if he can set a new record!

 

[Dog Town]

of course this was the day after AA announced they expected record losses for q4 (after 2 previous quarters of losing money)

It never ceases to amaze me, how ignorant of the real world, "twoofers" are!


They are like alzheimers patients, everyday, and everyone is something new!
"That's never happened before", or my favorite "WHY"! It's like a retarded 3 year old! They repeat the same tripe... repeatedly!


ETA: Redundent, I know, but that is them!

 

[Architect]

Er... explain? Are you saying the Memphis Belle wasn't a B-17, or that the B-17 wasn't designed by a team of engineers from the Boeing aircraft company?

-Gumboot

Putnam always said that the film is apparently true story of a British bomber team, but the only way the American's would finance the film was if it was changed to Americans. So they changed it to the B17 and tied it back to some wartime American documentary..........


....if I remember correctly.

 

[Gravy]

I like bringing up Allen Poteshman's work, as he's got a peer-reviewed paper saying that while the trading was unusual, it did not show foreknowledge of the attacks. The Paul Thompson Timeline tries to misrepresent his research.

Abstract
Full Paper

The paper is of very limited scope. Poteshman does conclude that the long put ratios were consistent with terrorist foreknowledge. That's fine. But he doesn't mention that these are just as consistent with the trading newsletter advice and quarterly projections that we know occurred in the week before the attacks, or that a lengthy investigation was done that identified the traders, or that the largest trader involved also purchased AA stock.

 

[gumboot]

Putnam always said that the film is apparently true story of a British bomber team, but the only way the American's would finance the film was if it was changed to Americans. So they changed it to the B17 and tied it back to some wartime American documentary..........


....if I remember correctly.

The Memphis Belle was an actual American B-17F Flying Fortress (serial 41-24485) with the 324th Bomb Squadron of the 91st Bomb Group, 8th US Army Air Force, based at Bassingbourn, England.

The Belle has two claims to fame - firstly, its crew, led by Captain Robert Morgan, were the first USAAF crew to successfully complete 25 combat missions (although 4 were in another aircraft). The airframe itself was also the first USAAF airframe to complete 25 combat missions (the last ones with a different crew) although it had every major part of its airframe replaced at least once during its service.

Obviously the film takes a lot of artistic license (the crew have different names, are composite characters, the events are taken from multiple missions, the Belle had a different crew for her 25th mission etc...) but the premise is accurate.

-Gumboot

 

[Architect]

That's it, I'll be scouring the internet for evidence of the Putman version!




So was Eric Stolz really on it then?

 

[gumboot]

That's it, I'll be scouring the internet for evidence of the Putman version!




So was Eric Stolz really on it then?

Yes. They CGI'd old footage of him from his war days into the film, kinda like a reverse Forrest Gump.

-Gumboot


ETA. It sounds like you might be confused with U-571. This fictional account was supposedly inspired by the true account of the capture of U-110 by the Royal Navy. The story was "Americanised" to ensure funding. Interestingly enough, David Balme, the British officer who actually led the party that snuck aboard U-110 and stole the encryption equipment, was very positive towards the film and actually argued in FAVOUR of its Americanisation (claiming it was required in order to secure financing).

 

[JonnyFive]

(for example watching darts on tv, or listening to 28th drone on).

Man, you must've done something really bad last year, with all the 28th K and ChristopherA you've been exposed to. What, did you design an orphanage that collapsed and killed three hundred babies and assorted adorable kittens or something?

 

[JonnyFive]

As far as put options go: as pointed out earlier, the levels weren't necessarily some all-time high. Even if they were, it's hardly solid evidence of a massive conspiracy absent other good information. It only sounds ominous when Avery and friends stick some techno music over it.

 

[Architect]

Man, you must've done something really bad last year, with all the 28th K and ChristopherA you've been exposed to. What, did you design an orphanage that collapsed and killed three hundred babies and assorted adorable kittens or something?

Aha! You're familiar with my work then?

 

[MikeW]

Who runs that site, Centcom?

No, I do. Why?

 

[Anti-sophist]

"Too coincidental" is a great term. I'd love to see their precise definition of that.

 

[JonnyFive]

"Too coincidental" is a great term. I'd love to see their precise definition of that.

"Of, or providing more coincidence than the prevailing trans-meta-theory requires or allows for, allowing for acceptable hyperdimensional flange reason thresholding."

 

[TjW]

And can something be "not coincidental enough"?

 

[JonnyFive]

And can something be "not coincidental enough"?

Yes.

 

[Anti-sophist]

Not to a conspiracy theorist. The concept of a random variable having a non-zero expected value blows their mind.

I always love when CTers try to tell me things are "too coincidental" because it allows for me to force them to expose their embarrassingly poor grasp of mathematics and probability.

 

[JonnyFive]

I always love when CTers try to tell me things are "too coincidental" because it allows for me to force them to expose their embarrassingly poor grasp of mathematics and probability.

Probability is to CTist ideas what a fire bomb is to six thousand pounds of dry straw soaked in gasoline.