ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi , Charles Norrie , Lockerbie bombing , Pan Am 103 , US-Iran relations

Reply
Old 3rd September 2010, 03:36 AM   #201
Zep
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 26,699
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
Zep, I am not the one going to be proceeding against Rolfe.
Oh? Then perhaps you might be more specific as to who might be, and why. You raised this issue - perhaps you might like to finish it off?

Quote:
I'm just telling her to be careful.
Of what? Or of whom? If nothing or no-one, why bother even mentioning this?

Please don't try to play the heavy here - you are well out of your depth and not in the least bit intimidating. You are in the company of people who actually do know a thing or two about science and the law, because they do it for a living. And right now you are failing miserably in both subjects.
Zep 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
Old 3rd September 2010, 03:50 AM   #202
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,771
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
The actual statement in the AAIB report says "not more than one IED", which leads me to believe that the AAIB were prepared to accept the CIA's statements that they must have been told about the package bomb in the CRAF hold.

An AAIB report is always written very defensively. Liability may be apportioned by such a report and it will be a prime statement in any litigation process. A friend of mine, an air accident lawyer has told me that the report finally written can bear no relation to previous drafts, so important what it actually says is.

So they knew there was a second expolsion caused by military ordnance, but they covered it up, but instead of simply not mantioning it at all, they introduced a coded sentence that the clever conspiracy theorist can decode to see the truth.

This is getting more like 9/11 twooferism by the minute.

Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
By the way the Maid of the Seas was a very old Boeing 747, and had been retrofitted as part of the CRAF reserve fleet changing its name from Morning Light.

IR-655 as a nice new Airbus, but the CIA were not going to waste a nice new aircraft in the plot were they? The demand was for blood, not airframes, so an old Boeing would do.

That's disgusting.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe 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
Old 3rd September 2010, 03:53 AM   #203
CharlesNorrie
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 101
I don't think I am out of my depth here. I have answered all sensible questions put to me.

I think I have demonstrate I know something about science and English libel law, which many who blog here don't. (e.g. the range of a radar gun is limited to 400m). Hantzauman had a proper radar set capable of receiving secondary radar controlled by NATS in Southern Scotland and also the reflected primary response.

I have simply warned Rolfe not to make unsubstantiated libels, which I have not done.
CharlesNorrie 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
Old 3rd September 2010, 03:55 AM   #204
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,771
Originally Posted by Caustic Logic View Post
Ambrosia, welcome back!
Actually, and thanks for the reference, it was referring to the neighboring container AVN 7511, which had a hole in it.

It's that 10" up that established the bomb's height - as if blast debris only travels in directly horizontal lines. Did some rough geometric visualizations on this once.
http://lockerbiedivide.blogspot.com/...-location.html

Well, they decided that the primary suitcase wasn't on the floor of the container because of the absence of pitting. Then they decided Karen Noonan's suitcase had been beneath it. That fits reasonably well with the 10" part. Are you suggesting it might have been higher? I don't think it was.

Originally Posted by Caustic Logic View Post
Charles, I warned you that if you came here planning to get banned and call that suppression, it would be shallow, unoriginal, and obvious.

Your antics are just about the speed of the debunker community here, and have made for a lively thread. For that I thank you.

It's fascinating the way this thread has grown, simply because there's an obvious conspiracy theorist to debunk. That's what people like doing, after all.

Not debunking a solid theory doesn't seem so attractive, and I notice Bunntamas didn't really get any takers when he tried to push the Official Version using only argument by blatant assertion.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe 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
Old 3rd September 2010, 03:57 AM   #205
CharlesNorrie
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 101
I'm sorry you think my analysis is disgusting, Rolfe, but it is my analysis and I did not commit Lockerbie. I was in Spain on holiday at the time, and I remember recognising the name of the town when it came up on the news on tv.

Don't blame the messenger for the message.

I never believed I would have to dedicate years of my life to having to understand what went on.
CharlesNorrie 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
Old 3rd September 2010, 03:58 AM   #206
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,771
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
Now, Ambrosia, don't you think it rather odd to bury away a claim "that there was not more than one IED at the bottom of Appendix F.

It looks rather like an afterthought.

And permit me to suggest it is a very carefully written sentence. Rolfe doesn't believe me in this, but I don't think that she has spent years reading dusty old Government policy documents.

I think there was a row between the CIA and AAIB. The CIA did not want any reference to IEDs, and in the end AAIB insisted, but it ended up tacked on like a coda at the bottom of Appendix F!

We could bicker about this for hours. Anyone want to approach Mr Protheroe or Mr Charles.

Charles, baseless supposition does not a credible theory make.

Do you really think that nobody at all in the AAIB would have made any serious waves either then or in the intervening 20 years, about such an enormous cover-up? If the evidence that was published really did support what you're asserting?

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe 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
Old 3rd September 2010, 03:59 AM   #207
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,771
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
I shall repeat my claim about libel Rolfe. You're the one doing it, not me. I actually saw that Hugh Tomlinson QC this morning.

If you think I have libelled anyone, feel free to point this out exactly. Indeed, feel free to report the post to the moderators.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe 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
Old 3rd September 2010, 04:01 AM   #208
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,771
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
As I've point out my Pan Am 103 score on Google has now improved from 58 to 1300

Oh dear. I thought only Kumar indulged in argument by Googlefight (is that the term, Zep?).

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe 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
Old 3rd September 2010, 04:04 AM   #209
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,771
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
\rolfe,

Posting silly animated characters may be your idea of how to conduct an argument, but it isn't mine.

I hope I have a good general scientific eduction, and knowing a little of how radar works is part of it.

Please grow up, rather than sounding off like a teenager in a civic studies class.

I'm really having to restrain myself with the laughing dog in this thread. But sometimes it's unavoidable.

Charles, on JREF you're dealing with a group of people with more than "a good general scientific education". Get deep enough into anything, and the likelihood is that someone will show up with a PhD in the subject.

This is not however the subject of my PhD.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe 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
Old 3rd September 2010, 04:14 AM   #210
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,771
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
That actually makes my theory simpler. Tanks for that. I'm always will to learn.

Charles, that's a fundamental point that comes out clearly in even the most supeerficial reading of the sequence of events at Heathrow. The idea that you didn't know this previously makes a complete mockery of your claims to have studies the Lockerbie incident for 20 years, especially as the location of the containers overnight and Bedford's selection of AVE4041 are absolutely central to your thesis.

Mod WarningSpeaking of things being simpler...using the Quote take makes it much simpler for members to follow along with the discussion. You have been asked to use them when quoting posts - please do so. If you need help, PM me or any member of the Mod Team. If you continue to refuse to do so, escalating moderation action including suspension or banning may apply.
Posted By:Locknar


Charles, last night I sent you a PM explaining a very quick and easy way to use the speech-bubble icon to generate quote tags, if you wanted to cut-and-paste the actual quotes. I did this because I really don't want to see you suspended again or even banned for this silly behaviour. What's wrong with you?

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe 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
Old 3rd September 2010, 04:20 AM   #211
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,771
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
I don't think I am out of my depth here. I have answered all sensible questions put to me.

No, you haven't given your source for believing that the luggage in AVE4041 was first class luggage. Either the original interline stuff, or the Frankfurt-origin stuff. It's been pointed out to you that Karen Noonan was flying economy.

Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
I think I have demonstrate I know something about science and English libel law, which many who blog here don't. (e.g. the range of a radar gun is limited to 400m). Hantzauman had a proper radar set capable of receiving secondary radar controlled by NATS in Southern Scotland and also the reflected primary response.

I think those of us who have been intimately following the Simon Singh case know more than you might think about English libel law. And as I mentioned, many members of this forum have higher degrees in scientific subjects while you boast an O level.

Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
I have simply warned Rolfe not to make unsubstantiated libels, which I have not done.

Might I reciprocate by warning you not to break the speed limit? Unless you have something more specific in mind than my completely made-up assumption that breaking the speed limit is something you might conceivably do.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe 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
Old 3rd September 2010, 04:34 AM   #212
Ambrosia
Good of the Fods
 
Ambrosia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,499
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
It would help if you got your facts right. UT-772 happened nine months after Lockerbie not before
I got my choronolgy mixed up - apologies.

Quote:
As I've said I believe any factual statement in the AAIB report but not the written padding,
Again I ask what qualifies you to seperate factual statement from written padding?

Quote:
As for explosive decompressions. there was only one,
O Really? I am not contesting there was only one, there was only one pressurised container, of course there was only one.

Quote:
when the pressure hull of Pan Am 103 was breached when the IED went off. The cab air was have blown out of the aircraft in rather less than half a second.

The second explosion went off 14 seconds later, but the aircraft was in the dark, or with emergency lighting only and diving at an angle of rather more than 45 degrees. It took place at 19000'
How do you know?

Your website claims that this is so because some of the wreckage from PA103 was never found, and that this was consumed by the brisant explosion caused by the 2nd bomb. Is that correct?

The mid air breakup of PA103 is documented by the AAIB report as follows.
(I'm paraphrasing, please do go and check the report to ensure I am not mistaken here)

21st December 1988 PA103 levels off at cruising altitude of 31000' at 19:56 at about 19:03 during radio transmission of oceanic clearance from ATC the last radar return is noted, very shortly after this the IED detonates.

The initial blast shockwave punches a small hole in the luggage container, and a larger hole approximately 20" by 10" in the outer skin of the aircraft. Pressurised hull integrity is still holding at this point, the cargo hold not being pressurised.

A fraction of a second later the blast wave(the actual hot gases of the explosion) blows a much larger hole in the side of the aircraft, the petalled starburst hole near the detonation point as well as probably causing other ruptures at other points in the aircraft, hull integrity is lost and the aircraft depressurises.

The combined explosive forces of the blast shockwaves break control cables and apply inputs to some control surfaces of the aircraft causing it to turn left and point downwards at approximately 45degrees.

2-3 seconds after the explosion with the aircraft pointed downwards and rolled to the left the forces of the explosion combined with the decompression are tearing the aircraft apart along it's weakest points (mostly where it is rivetted together) at cruising speed such an aircraft travels at about 500mph (434Knots) so there is the added force of a 500mph wind outside the aircraft to aid in the destruction. At about this point in time the flight deck and a portion of the front of the aircraft detaches, it strikes #3 engine, detaching it from the wing.

We know this must be the sequence of breakup because of analyisis of where seperate pieces of the aircraft fell.

The aircraft is now pitched nose down, it's accelerating as it falls, it is missing an engine and has no nose. 500mph+ winds are tearing through the aircraft as it falls and these forces break apart the airframe further. At about 19000' the aircraft is descending vertically, still accelerating and the tail, which was struck by debris from the initial blast, and from aircraft contents released by the initial blast, breaks free. No explosive residues are found in the tail structure, this completely rules out a 2nd explosion in the tail area.

Aside from the area around the first IED no explosion damage was detected anywhere else in the aircraft.

The AAIB are not entirely sure what caused the tail to break off, they do strongly suspect the large forces being applied to the airframe from air resistance as having a major part to play in it however (flutter).

As the aircraft continues to fall vertically it breaks up even more, once the tail is gone it begins to spin (presumably as a result of the stuck control surfaces on the wings that were initially responsible for the immediate roll to the left early on) this shears off the remaining engines. At about 9000' the aircraft is almost totally disintegrated.

It strikes the ground approximately 45 seconds after the initial blast.
Ambrosia 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
Old 3rd September 2010, 04:36 AM   #213
CharlesNorrie
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 101
I wasn't boasting of an O-level, Rolfe. What I was saying was that this is the sort of scientific question a person with O-level should know the answer to.
CharlesNorrie 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
Old 3rd September 2010, 04:41 AM   #214
Ambrosia
Good of the Fods
 
Ambrosia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,499
Originally Posted by SpitfireIX View Post
In Figure B-24 the initial hole is called out as "Incident shock shatters 20x20 hole." However, it looks more rectangular in that illustration, also.
Good spot - thanks.

I still can't find reference to Peter Claiden stating this in the trial transcripts of his evidence, I am hoping that Charles will be able to direct me to where this was said to support his claims, it's entirely possible I have overlooked this sentance in the 2 days worth of evidence given by Mr Claiden.
Ambrosia 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
Old 3rd September 2010, 04:51 AM   #215
CharlesNorrie
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 101
Ambrosia,

All the passengers and luggage were inside the pressure hold. When a hole was blown in that all the air blew out.

Both explosions were caused by brisant explosives. To make sure that there was no difficulty in analysing the residues, Semtex was I suggest used in both explosions.

I calculated the 14 seconds from an aircraft travelling at 800 kph for 3.1 km. See Fig 4 AAIB report.

The cargo hold is pressurised, I'll think you'll find and the hole in the external skin is 20" by 20" from a hole on the side of the container of 8" by 8".

You go on about the explosion almost ricocheting through the aircraft, but what is propagating it. The aircraft was depressurised in about 1/10 second. And what cause the second trail?

No analysis has been presented of the tail (CRAF) section structure, which is rather different. RARDE did all the explosives work. AAIB refused to handle it, I conclude.

I disagree with you when you say there was no damage other than the IED explosion. What caused the second and northerly trail then. It's shorter (the aircraft was lower) and more densely populated. There's a diagram to show that.

Apart from that your summary is fairly accurate but not noteworthy.
CharlesNorrie 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
Old 3rd September 2010, 04:53 AM   #216
CharlesNorrie
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 101
I think you should do a little work for once Ambrosia. You're making quit a lot of rather silly mistakes.
CharlesNorrie 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
Old 3rd September 2010, 04:59 AM   #217
zooterkin
Nitpicking dilettante
Deputy Admin
 
zooterkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Berkshire, mostly
Posts: 41,500
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
All the passengers and luggage were inside the pressure hold.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.Bertrand Russell
Zooterkin is correct Darat
Nerd! Hokulele
Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232
Ezekiel 23:20
zooterkin 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
Old 3rd September 2010, 05:12 AM   #218
CharlesNorrie
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 101
Rolfe, I don't think my claim that the author of the AAIB report report buried away the not more than one IED claim is irrelevant.
CharlesNorrie 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
Old 3rd September 2010, 05:14 AM   #219
CharlesNorrie
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 101
What's a PM Rolfe. You have my email at norriecb [at] gmail [dot] com, if you want to get in touch with me.
CharlesNorrie 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
Old 3rd September 2010, 05:16 AM   #220
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,771
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
Rolfe, I don't think my claim that the author of the AAIB report report buried away the not more than one IED claim is irrelevant.

I didn't say it was isrrelevant, I said it was ridiculous.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe 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
Old 3rd September 2010, 05:19 AM   #221
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,771
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
What's a PM Rolfe. You have my email at norriecb [at] gmail [dot] com, if you want to get in touch with me.

This forum allows members to send and receive Private Messages as well as posting messages in the public forum. If you didn't get the notification that you had a private message from me, simply find your private message box (under the "User CP" menu at the top among other places) and you'll be able to read it.

I told you I have no intention of emailing you.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe 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
Old 3rd September 2010, 05:21 AM   #222
CharlesNorrie
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 101
Rolfe, once again you are being very silly, but at least you have removed the laughing dog.

Argument by animated character (a new one to me) is beneath contempt.

It is for you to deal with your libels. I wrote my piece so that it did not libel anyone, except HW Bush and he, as my solicitor explained would not sue for fear of dignifying my argument.

If anyone here has a PhD, they haven't demonstrated it. And a PhD is not a proof that someone can think. There are actually some rather dim doctors out there
CharlesNorrie 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
Old 3rd September 2010, 05:32 AM   #223
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,771
I didn't do anything about the laughing dog. I try to restrain myself with that one, but if you're missing him, here he is again.



Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe 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
Old 3rd September 2010, 05:34 AM   #224
Zep
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 26,699
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
The aircraft was depressurised in about 1/10 second.
Wrong. The aircraft could not have been depressurised in that amount of time through even a largish hole. It could have started to be depressurised and leaking air rapidly, but not that fast.

Let's check the maths: A 747 is a tube roughly 60m long by 6m diameter. Basic maths gives is 9 * pi * 60 = 1,700 cubic meters of air, approximately as the volume of the aircraft. That has to go through a hole 20 x 20 inches = 0.25 square meters. So we need to get 1700 cubic meters through a 0.25 meter square hole. Again, maths says that is a tube 0.25 sqm x 6,800 meters long. So for that tube to travel its complete length in 0.1 of a second means it is doing 68,000 meters per second, or just over 150,000 mph.

Do you agree?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_747#Specifications

Last edited by Zep; 3rd September 2010 at 05:35 AM.
Zep 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
Old 3rd September 2010, 05:38 AM   #225
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,771
Originally Posted by Ambrosia View Post
No explosive residues are found in the tail structure, this completely rules out a 2nd explosion in the tail area.

Aside from the area around the first IED no explosion damage was detected anywhere else in the aircraft.

Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
Apart from that your summary is fairly accurate but not noteworthy.

By the way, Charles, noteworthy = notable. You're familiar with the concept of synonyms?

So, you accept that there were no explosive residues in the tail, and no explosion damage other than at the position of AVE4041?

I suspect you don't though. Sigh.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe 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
Old 3rd September 2010, 05:46 AM   #226
Sabretooth
No Ordinary Rabbit
 
Sabretooth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Wyoming, NY
Posts: 6,707
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
I shall repeat my claim about libel Rolfe. You're the one doing it, not me. I actually saw that Hugh Tomlinson QC this morning.
I don't believe "libel" means what you think it means...

Libel: a false and malicious publication printed for the purpose of defaming a living person

That aside, are you going to answer my questions? Or just hope I go away?
__________________
--------------------------------------
Stop asking me about that stupid fruity cereal...that's the OTHER rabbit!

Sabretooth 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
Old 3rd September 2010, 05:47 AM   #227
CharlesNorrie
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 101
No I don't Zep. And you can work out for yourself why your argument is wrong.

Please start at looking at my top down reasoning. Who wanted revenge for IR-655
CharlesNorrie 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
Old 3rd September 2010, 05:49 AM   #228
CharlesNorrie
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 101
Dear sbretooth,

It was i who took the advice of a leading English libel lawyer, not you. I really don't care what your definition of libel is: it's that of the English courts.
CharlesNorrie 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
Old 3rd September 2010, 05:50 AM   #229
CharlesNorrie
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 101
You will give up and go away Sabre, if you care for your anity.
CharlesNorrie 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
Old 3rd September 2010, 05:51 AM   #230
Ambrosia
Good of the Fods
 
Ambrosia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,499
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
All the passengers and luggage were inside the pressure hold. When a hole was blown in that all the air blew out.
You are correct, the cargo hold is pressurised and depressurisation begins as soon as there is a breach in the hull. It does take a long time however for this to happen relative to the length of time it took the blast wave from the IED to blast the much larger starburst hole in the front of the aircraft.

Quote:
Both explosions were caused by brisant explosives. To make sure that there was no difficulty in analysing the residues, Semtex was I suggest used in both explosions.
Again I ask, how do you come to the conclusion that there were 2 explosive devices aboard PA103? What qualifies you to seperate statements of fact from written padding in the AAIB report?

Quote:
RARDE did all the explosives work. AAIB refused to handle it, I conclude.
AAIB are an air accident investigation facility. RARDE was an explosives R&D laboratory.

Quote:
I disagree with you when you say there was no damage other than the IED explosion.
Originally Posted by Ambrosia
Aside from the area around the first IED no explosion damage was detected anywhere else in the aircraft.
The debris trials were a consequence of the aircraft disintegrating as it fell. Read the summary I just posted.

IED explodes - 2-3 seconds later the front of the fuselage detaches and takes with it 1 engine. The remainder of the aircraft falls relatively intact for 12000' and then the tail section detaches, now falling almost vertically and spinning the remaining debris breaks apart.

Plane starts flying level at 31000' 434Knots airpseed. IED explodes plane is pitched into a 45degree angle of descent, contents of the plane, and debris from the explosion make up one debris trail. The plane descends ever more vertically as it falls to 19000' when the next major breakup occurs. All of the wreckage from here on out falls almost vertically to earth, hence shorter more densely populated debris trail.

There was more than enough force acting on the airframe as it descended for it to be torn apart without the need for a 2nd bomb as my summary of the breakup is meant to illustrate.

How can you be sure there was a 2nd bomb? How on earth do bombers ensure a second bomb would even detonate with all the likely destruction that will occur in the plane once the first device explodes? Why on earth plant 2 bombs if you can't guarantee both will explode and risk having an unexploded bomb, that is traceable to you, fall to earth into the clutches of air accident investigators??

It makes no sense at all.
Ambrosia 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
Old 3rd September 2010, 05:52 AM   #231
CharlesNorrie
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 101
Rolfe,

Why do you think I don't know what a synonym means. I dis all that in a classic English edcation at the age of 12, and can distinguish between a synonym and a metaphor. Why don't yo get intelligent about my contribution, or do you work for the CIA?
CharlesNorrie 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
Old 3rd September 2010, 06:00 AM   #232
CharlesNorrie
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 101
Once again, Ambrosia, you are wrong. The bit of RARDE we are interested in is the forensic research laboratory situated within an explosives factory. Why, I don't know and long have speculated. Again, Ambrosia, look at the debris diagram which shows two distinct trails in the AAIB report. An engine detaching would not cause a debris trail.

I have explained exactly how the second device was detonated; that using radar the perpetrator of the second explosion, learned about the first and triggered it.

I can't prove it, because those who triggered the second explosion have not talked about it. But if you think about what I am saying it is perfectly credible, and nothing said here yet has nay-sayed me.

You are getting rather boring.
CharlesNorrie 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
Old 3rd September 2010, 06:01 AM   #233
Sabretooth
No Ordinary Rabbit
 
Sabretooth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Wyoming, NY
Posts: 6,707
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
I don't think I am out of my depth here. I have answered all sensible questions put to me.
No, you have not...and I will continue to point out this fact until you answer my questions and explain the gapping holes in your story.

Please review my post #158, which is a compilation of my questions and points. For your convenience, here is a direct link:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...&postcount=158
__________________
--------------------------------------
Stop asking me about that stupid fruity cereal...that's the OTHER rabbit!

Sabretooth 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
Old 3rd September 2010, 06:05 AM   #234
CharlesNorrie
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 101
Gapping hole, Sabre. have told you what I can prove and cannot, and the bits I cannot for obvious reasons. I'm not going to read your rather obvious and dim comments, and that does not prove you are right!
CharlesNorrie 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
Old 3rd September 2010, 06:14 AM   #235
Zep
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 26,699
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
No I don't Zep. And you can work out for yourself why your argument is wrong.
OK, show us apparent ignoramuses why. I have given you some clear mathematics using your own facts. If the calculations are wrong, refute them now. Or else they stand as the consequences of your own arguments.

Quote:
Please start at looking at my top down reasoning. Who wanted revenge for IR-655
Irrelevant to this point, and it doesn't change the facts.
Zep 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
Old 3rd September 2010, 06:15 AM   #236
Ambrosia
Good of the Fods
 
Ambrosia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,499
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
Once again, Ambrosia, you are wrong. The bit of RARDE we are interested in is the forensic research laboratory situated within an explosives factory.
AAIB = Air Accident Investigation

RARDE = Explosvies R&D laboratory.

RARDE have expertise and a forensic research facilty to do with explosives. Items identified with possible damage caused by explosives were sent for testing to the people with the specific expertise in explosives.

What is hard to understand?

Quote:
An engine detaching would not cause a debris trail.
I don't say that it would, I do strongly suspect that the front of an aircraft detaching and the contents of the aircraft being blown out of the huge hole in the front of the aircraft, as well as debris caused by an explosion that ripped the front of the fuselage to pieces, will most certainy cause a debris trail.

Furthermore a debris trail that will fall in a different area given the different speeds and direction it is falling in and height it is falling from, than debris from a later breakup when the aircraft is falling at a much steeper angle.

Quote:
I have explained exactly how the second device was detonated
I don't care how the 2nd device was detonated. You have yet to convince me there was a 2nd device at all. First we establish there was a 2nd bomb and then after that we look into how it might have been detonated.

How do you know there was a 2nd bomb?

Please answer this simple question.
Ambrosia 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
Old 3rd September 2010, 06:17 AM   #237
Sabretooth
No Ordinary Rabbit
 
Sabretooth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Wyoming, NY
Posts: 6,707
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
You go on about the explosion almost ricocheting through the aircraft, but what is propagating it. The aircraft was depressurised in about 1/10 second. And what cause the second trail?
Would you mind elaborating on this statement and question?

The fact that the aircraft depressurized in less than a second has nothing to with propogating the reflection of the shockwave after the explosion.

In another words, depressurization would not inhibit the reflection of the shockwave.

And where did the 1/10 of a second come from? Didn't AAIB say 3 seconds?
__________________
--------------------------------------
Stop asking me about that stupid fruity cereal...that's the OTHER rabbit!


Last edited by Sabretooth; 3rd September 2010 at 06:28 AM.
Sabretooth 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
Old 3rd September 2010, 06:24 AM   #238
Sabretooth
No Ordinary Rabbit
 
Sabretooth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Wyoming, NY
Posts: 6,707
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
Dear sbretooth,

It was i who took the advice of a leading English libel lawyer, not you. I really don't care what your definition of libel is: it's that of the English courts.
Um...it's not my definition, Charles...that is the English dictionary definition...

You boasted of your mastery of the English language in this very thread...surely you know the definition of this rather simple word?
__________________
--------------------------------------
Stop asking me about that stupid fruity cereal...that's the OTHER rabbit!

Sabretooth 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
Old 3rd September 2010, 06:24 AM   #239
CharlesNorrie
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 101
Ambrosia, where did the second, northerly debris trail come from. It comes not from simply disintegration. It must have been an explosion. Sabre, your worthless comments are noted, and rejected.
CharlesNorrie 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
Old 3rd September 2010, 06:25 AM   #240
Sabretooth
No Ordinary Rabbit
 
Sabretooth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Wyoming, NY
Posts: 6,707
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
You will give up and go away Sabre, if you care for your anity.
What are you going to do? Nibble my bum?
__________________
--------------------------------------
Stop asking me about that stupid fruity cereal...that's the OTHER rabbit!

Sabretooth 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
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:05 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.