|
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. |
3rd September 2010, 03:36 AM | #201 |
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 26,704
|
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:
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. |
3rd September 2010, 03:50 AM | #202 |
Adult human female
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 50,594
|
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. 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. |
|
3rd September 2010, 03:53 AM | #203 |
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. |
3rd September 2010, 03:55 AM | #204 |
Adult human female
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 50,594
|
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. 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. |
|
3rd September 2010, 03:57 AM | #205 |
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. |
3rd September 2010, 03:58 AM | #206 |
Adult human female
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 50,594
|
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. |
|
3rd September 2010, 03:59 AM | #207 |
Adult human female
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 50,594
|
|
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012. |
|
3rd September 2010, 04:01 AM | #208 |
Adult human female
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 50,594
|
|
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012. |
|
3rd September 2010, 04:04 AM | #209 |
Adult human female
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 50,594
|
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. |
|
3rd September 2010, 04:14 AM | #210 | ||
Adult human female
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 50,594
|
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.
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. |
|||
3rd September 2010, 04:20 AM | #211 |
Adult human female
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 50,594
|
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. 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. 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. |
|
3rd September 2010, 04:34 AM | #212 |
Good of the Fods
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,675
|
I got my choronolgy mixed up - apologies.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
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. |
3rd September 2010, 04:36 AM | #213 |
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.
|
3rd September 2010, 04:41 AM | #214 |
Good of the Fods
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,675
|
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. |
3rd September 2010, 04:51 AM | #215 |
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. |
3rd September 2010, 04:53 AM | #216 |
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.
|
3rd September 2010, 04:59 AM | #217 |
Nitpicking dilettante
Administrator Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Berkshire, mostly
Posts: 57,669
|
|
__________________
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 |
|
3rd September 2010, 05:12 AM | #218 |
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.
|
3rd September 2010, 05:14 AM | #219 |
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.
|
3rd September 2010, 05:16 AM | #220 |
Adult human female
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 50,594
|
|
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012. |
|
3rd September 2010, 05:19 AM | #221 |
Adult human female
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 50,594
|
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. |
|
3rd September 2010, 05:21 AM | #222 |
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 |
3rd September 2010, 05:32 AM | #223 |
Adult human female
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 50,594
|
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. |
|
3rd September 2010, 05:34 AM | #224 |
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 26,704
|
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 |
3rd September 2010, 05:38 AM | #225 |
Adult human female
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 50,594
|
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. |
|
3rd September 2010, 05:46 AM | #226 |
No Ordinary Rabbit
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Wyoming, NY
Posts: 6,757
|
|
__________________
-------------------------------------- Stop asking me about that stupid fruity cereal...that's the OTHER rabbit! |
|
3rd September 2010, 05:47 AM | #227 |
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 |
3rd September 2010, 05:49 AM | #228 |
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. |
3rd September 2010, 05:50 AM | #229 |
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 101
|
You will give up and go away Sabre, if you care for your anity.
|
3rd September 2010, 05:51 AM | #230 |
Good of the Fods
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,675
|
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:
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambrosia
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. |
3rd September 2010, 05:52 AM | #231 |
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? |
3rd September 2010, 06:00 AM | #232 |
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. |
3rd September 2010, 06:01 AM | #233 |
No Ordinary Rabbit
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Wyoming, NY
Posts: 6,757
|
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! |
|
3rd September 2010, 06:05 AM | #234 |
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!
|
3rd September 2010, 06:14 AM | #235 |
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 26,704
|
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:
|
3rd September 2010, 06:15 AM | #236 |
Good of the Fods
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,675
|
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:
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:
How do you know there was a 2nd bomb? Please answer this simple question. |
3rd September 2010, 06:17 AM | #237 |
No Ordinary Rabbit
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Wyoming, NY
Posts: 6,757
|
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! |
|
3rd September 2010, 06:24 AM | #238 |
No Ordinary Rabbit
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Wyoming, NY
Posts: 6,757
|
|
__________________
-------------------------------------- Stop asking me about that stupid fruity cereal...that's the OTHER rabbit! |
|
3rd September 2010, 06:24 AM | #239 |
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.
|
3rd September 2010, 06:25 AM | #240 |
No Ordinary Rabbit
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Wyoming, NY
Posts: 6,757
|
|
__________________
-------------------------------------- Stop asking me about that stupid fruity cereal...that's the OTHER rabbit! |
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|