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
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.
Only if I agree with your true altitude calculation, is that even remotely true. I don't.
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.
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.