View Single Post
Old 15th October 2006, 11:57 AM   #43
Anti-sophist
Graduate Poster
 
Anti-sophist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,542
Quote:
The True Altitude of the aircraft at the ":44 Frame" was 480MSL. At 66ft/sec it would take 7.2 seconds longer to hit the pentagon. At this rate if it were low enough to hit the poles, it would have plowed into the ground prior to hitting the pentagon. If it increased its rate (which the accelerometer shows), it would have plowed into the ground sooner.
He is confusing the issue. The above document does NOT debunk his "true altitude" calculation. This calculation is based entirely on defining the instrument error. He is absolutely right when he says the errors I'm talking about fractions of a second (well, as much as 2 seconds). If his true altitude number is correct, he is actually on to something.

The problem is the instrument error of the altimeter has been well established. No one seems to agree with his "true altitude" calculation except for him. Even other CTers have dismissed his altitude calculations as bogus. Basing his entire calculation on a precise altitude at 500 knots and a few hundred feet has been thoroughly debunked, before, and I don't need to do it again.

There is a reason he created his alternate analysis that is based on descent speed, and impact point, trying to determine the height at the lightpoles. That's because not even other conspiracy theorists believe this line of reasoning. Maybe if he shows some intellectual honesty, and admits his "Alternate Analysis for light poles, Working backwards from impact point" (http://z9.invisionfree.com/Pilots_For_Truth/index.php?showtopic=84&st=0&#last) is fundamentally flawed, we can work from there.

The error issues I raise in this document, specfically, attack the methodology he uses in all 3 versions of his "alternate analysis". He then says "It doesn't apply to my true altitude calculation!". Claiming that, by him, is a strawman. I'm not trying to debunk his "true altitude" calculation.. the errors in that calculation rest (almost) entirely on the instrument error.

Quote:
So, in order for Anti-Sophist to have his way.. he needs to get the NTSB to admit the aircraft struck the pentagon at 09:37:51. Or during the :51 "frame".
Only if I agree with your true altitude calculation, is that even remotely true. I don't.

Quote:
He makes a nice attempt to show confusion and chaos as most JREFers do
That's what science above your level of comprehension looks like. FDR data isn't "simple" and pretending it is would be a mistake. He wants to do simple analysis on a complicated data set. Pretending that it "should" be simple, and anyone who wants to make it "complicated" is "showing confusion" is psuedoscience and kookery.

Quote:
The NTSB used ATC transmissions, Radar data and the FDR to reconstruct the animation. Its in real time.
The animation is based on the information in the public domain. I've already established that information is incomplete and has errors compared with the raw FDR data. Why would they release an animation based on information that was still classified/sensitive? The animation is as accurate as the data it is based on... the data it is based on is accurate enough to give an idea of what happened.

No one ever claimed it had accuracy to the foot, or the fraction of the second.
__________________
A witty saying proves nothing. -Voltaire
Anti-sophist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top