IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts 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, 06:27 AM   #241
Zep
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 26,704
Originally Posted by sabretooth47 View Post
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?
He boasted his mastery in a post that was riddled with grammar and punctuation errors. That was a clue...
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, 06:28 AM   #242
CharlesNorrie
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 101
Sabre,

One is not convicted of libel on a definition in a dictionary. You have to bring a case in the courts.

So, I won't talk to you until you get rid of your silly nit-picking attitude. I don't think you have the slightest idea of what constitutes a libel case in 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, 06:29 AM   #243
Zep
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 26,704
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
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.
Total speculation based on unfounded supposition. This isn't going well for you, Charles.
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, 06:30 AM   #244
Zep
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 26,704
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
Sabre,

One is not convicted of libel on a definition in a dictionary. You have to bring a case in the courts.

So, I won't talk to you until you get rid of your silly nit-picking attitude. I don't think you have the slightest idea of what constitutes a libel case in the English courts.
I do. Sabretooth is correct.

Carry on!
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, 06:33 AM   #245
CharlesNorrie
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 101
Ambrosia,

You said about RARDE, what is hard to understand. I don't think you have followed the structural debacle of that organisation before the English appeal courts. Both Mr Fereday and Dr Hayes had cases thrown out by them on the evidence they had provided evidence at the primary trials.

Start with the MacGuire case for one.
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, 06:35 AM   #246
CharlesNorrie
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 101
Do be sensible, Sabre. But you've proved yourself not worth engaging with.
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, 06:50 AM   #247
zooterkin
Nitpicking dilettante
Administrator
 
zooterkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Berkshire, mostly
Posts: 57,668
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post

You said about RARDE, what is hard to understand.
Royal Armament Research and Development Establishment. No, nothing too hard there. The second word would seem to be a clue...

Quote:
I don't think you have followed the structural debacle of that organisation before the English appeal courts.
What is that sentence supposed to mean? What do you mean by "structural debacle"?
Quote:
Both Mr Fereday and Dr Hayes had cases thrown out by them on the evidence they had provided evidence at the primary trials.
It's almost impossible to extract meaning from this sentence. Could you try again, this time following the rules of English grammar?
__________________
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, 06:53 AM   #248
Sabretooth
No Ordinary Rabbit
 
Sabretooth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Wyoming, NY
Posts: 6,757
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
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.
AAIB says the second (northern) trail was primarily the debris from the tail structure.

The AAIB also says there was no evidence of a second IED. Where is your evidence that refutes this statment?
__________________
--------------------------------------
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, 06:59 AM   #249
Sabretooth
No Ordinary Rabbit
 
Sabretooth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Wyoming, NY
Posts: 6,757
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
Sabre,

One is not convicted of libel on a definition in a dictionary. You have to bring a case in the courts.

So, I won't talk to you until you get rid of your silly nit-picking attitude. I don't think you have the slightest idea of what constitutes a libel case in the English courts.
So, then, when you made this statement (directed to me) in your post #12:

Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie Post #12
You are a very silly and ignorant American nationalist.
I could, quite legally in an English court, sue you for libel, yes? After all, you have no proof that I am such.


ETA - Apologies for the derail everyone...
__________________
--------------------------------------
Stop asking me about that stupid fruity cereal...that's the OTHER rabbit!


Last edited by Sabretooth; 3rd September 2010 at 07:09 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, 07:06 AM   #250
Sabretooth
No Ordinary Rabbit
 
Sabretooth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Wyoming, NY
Posts: 6,757
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
Do be sensible, Sabre. But you've proved yourself not worth engaging with.
How so? You've completely ignored my questions. When I ask for a response, you've gone so far as to throw me some personal insults.

Are you upset that I don't buy your story?
Or do you not like people pointing out your lack of research?

Either way, I'll ask one of my questions again:

Why do you find it surprising that PA103 experienced explosive decompression from the IED?
__________________
--------------------------------------
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, 07:20 AM   #251
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: USA! USA!
Posts: 24,384
@CharlesNorrie

I'm just trying to follow the conversation, as this topic is not my forte.

However, please allow me to second or third or fourth the request for you to use the quote function. It's difficult and silly to have to scroll up and try to figure out what specific points you are addressing in your writing. If you are having trouble understanding it, please see the 'help' section or FAQ, or as suggested, even send a PM (private message) to a moderator.

Thanks.
carlitos 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, 07:49 AM   #252
Rolfe
Adult human female
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 50,594
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
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.

Everybody else is perfectly content to accept that the two-trail pattern is a result of the way the aircraft disintegrated. The AAIB report is in the public domain for all to read.

Where are all the air accident investigators in other jurisdictions coming forward to point out that the official AAIB explanation is so horribly wrong?

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, 08:03 AM   #253
CharlesNorrie
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 101
Red between the lines, Sabre. And unlike you I haven't spent 20 years doing nothing.
I don't find it at all surprising that Pan Am 103 experienced decompression, which happened very quicly indeed when the first explosion took place.

I don't know about this quote function, Carlitos.

Rolfe, just because because everybody else is happy to accept a two trail pattern, doesn't mean I am. Please read my analysis again and again, if necessary until you are physically sick. NO OTHER AAIB with run with this potato, but it sill exists, to uote a more famous physicist than 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, 08:15 AM   #254
Sabretooth
No Ordinary Rabbit
 
Sabretooth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Wyoming, NY
Posts: 6,757
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
Red between the lines, Sabre. And unlike you I haven't spent 20 years doing nothing.
I don't find it at all surprising that Pan Am 103 experienced decompression, which happened very quicly indeed when the first explosion took place.
You made the following observation in your blog article:

Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie Blog-a-vestigation
Peter Claydon told the court the bomb created an 8-inch square hole in AVE4041 PA and a 20-inch square hole in the skin of the aircraft. This was, however, small compared to the size of the plane and experts were puzzled about how such a small explosion could have caused so much damage.
Then you made the following statement:

Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie Blog-a-vestigation
This befuddled me for years – how could such a small device completely obliterate Flight 103? The plane's fuel tanks couldn't have contributed to the blast because they exploded on the ground at Lockerbie. I was not alone in my confusion.
So I ask again...why was this surprising to you? The AAIB report was very clear as to why this relatively small IED caused the destruction of PA103.
__________________
--------------------------------------
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, 08:22 AM   #255
CharlesNorrie
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 101
The answer in the AAIB report, Sabre, is inadequate. No explanation is given as to why the break-up happened. I don't know why, but I can see dissimulation when I see it. It will cause me great sorrow when the AAIB (a very decent organisation) is challenged in their findings all to support the wrongdoings of a US state terrorist organisation.
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, 08:22 AM   #256
Sabretooth
No Ordinary Rabbit
 
Sabretooth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Wyoming, NY
Posts: 6,757
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
Red between the lines, Sabre. And unlike you I haven't spent 20 years doing nothing.
For the sake of disclosure, I want you to be aware of my qualifications with aircraft. I spent 6 years in school studying airframe and powerplant mechanics. I also spent 4 years working with small aircraft at a local airfield. I've also spent time working with several investigators that are employed by the NTSB...as well as with a gentleman that worked with the TSB in Canada.

I'm not pointing this out to be boastful, but merely so you stop treating me like some little kid who doesn't know what they're talking about.
__________________
--------------------------------------
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, 08:22 AM   #257
Ambrosia
Good of the Fods
 
Ambrosia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,675
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
You said about RARDE, what is hard to understand. I don't think you have followed the structural debacle of that organisation before the English appeal courts.
Read back through the threads posted here on this topic and you will see that that is not so. I am very well aware of RARDE's track record in previous cases.

That is beside the point though.

AAIB do air accident investigations, they don't do forensic research on explosives and are not best qualified to work out what type of explosive is what. They also had a lot of work on at the time!

Why RARDE was used and not a n other explosives lab is a good question, but it is not one that you have asked.

I have asked two questons of you in particular that I would very much like you to answer.

i) How do you know there were two bombs aboard PA103? Surely your theory cannot rest on "there were two debris trails therefore it follows that there must, and can only have been, two explosive devices"

ii) What qualifies you to decide which parts of the AAIB report are fact and which are 'written padding'?

I have a whole raft of questions I would like to debate with you about John Parkes, I've only ready his report, you've spoken to him in person.

Unless you can answer these two basic starter questions though it's pointless going further.
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, 08:24 AM   #258
Rolfe
Adult human female
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 50,594
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
Red between the lines, Sabre. And unlike you I haven't spent 20 years doing nothing.

This isn't very polite Charles. You have no idea what Sabretooth has been doing for the past 20 years. And you yourself have ridiculed others for spending what seems to you to be an excessive amount of time considering the Lockerbie affair.

This continual injunction to "read between the lines" is irritating and will get you nowhere. If you want people to understand your thesis, you have to explain it in plain, understandable terms.

Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
I don't find it at all surprising that Pan Am 103 experienced decompression, which happened very quicly indeed when the first explosion took place.

Then why are you so hung up on this fictional seciond explosion then?

Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
I don't know about this quote function, Carlitos.

I explained one way to use it in an early post. Just click on the button labelled "quote" in the bottom right area of the post you want to quote. And be careful to close the quote tag and open it again if you want to make comments in the middle of a quoted passage.

I PMed you with information about an easy way to get pasted quotes to show up as quotes - just highlight the quoted passage you pasted in, and click on the little speech-bubble icon above the reply form.

It's not difficult. What's wrong with you Charles, a child could understand this.

Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
Rolfe, just because because everybody else is happy to accept a two trail pattern, doesn't mean I am. Please read my analysis again and again, if necessary until you are physically sick. NO OTHER AAIB with run with this potato, but it sill exists, to uote a more famous physicist than me.

Charles, I've read your fantasy quite enough to see it for a fantasy. You have to realise by now that you have not succeeded in making a convincing case with that document. You need to ask yourself where you have failed in this, and try harder to explain yourself. Not throw temper tantrums and tell people to "read between the lines".

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, 08:28 AM   #259
CharlesNorrie
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 101
Then Sabre, show your understanding is worthy of your training.
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, 08:31 AM   #260
Rolfe
Adult human female
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 50,594
Charles, why do assume that to "show understanding" it is necessary for Sabretooth to agree with your interpretation? What are your formal qualifications and professional experience that are relevant to this analysis? Do you not consider any possibility that it is you who are mistaken?

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.

Last edited by Rolfe; 3rd September 2010 at 08:54 AM.
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, 08:32 AM   #261
CharlesNorrie
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 101
Ambrosia, if We were to ask yourslef the question as to why RARDE was used, given the failures of its two Lockerbie investigators, you might come to the conclusion that they were chosen because they were broken reeds.

Please the read again my reasons for saying that there was more than one explosion. Consider the work of Mr John Parks for instance.

I have never met Mr Parks

I can distinguish between the plain facts and what appears to be mere opinion.
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, 08:36 AM   #262
CharlesNorrie
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 101
And I spent wearisme times with you Rolfe on Black's blogspot and now here? Why do you show so much reluctance to understand? I've told you the factual limits of my knowledge. Professional qualifications are worth nothing as compared with the necessity of trying to think.
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, 08:44 AM   #263
Sabretooth
No Ordinary Rabbit
 
Sabretooth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Wyoming, NY
Posts: 6,757
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie Blog
This befuddled me for years – how could such a small device completely obliterate Flight 103? The plane's fuel tanks couldn't have contributed to the blast because they exploded on the ground at Lockerbie. I was not alone in my confusion.
To offer yet another source:

Originally Posted by NTSB Smith AAR Report regarding PA103; Page 11; Part 2.1.2
[...] Any break of substantial size in the highly pressurized hull, for reasons such as a bomb explosion, a mid air collision, or an inadvertently opened cargo door, would be sufficient to cause an explosive decompression and subsequent partial or full inflight breakup.
Source: http://www.ntsb.org/Wiringcargodoor/...artapA-N_1.pdf
__________________
--------------------------------------
Stop asking me about that stupid fruity cereal...that's the OTHER rabbit!


Last edited by Sabretooth; 3rd September 2010 at 08:54 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, 08:47 AM   #264
Sabretooth
No Ordinary Rabbit
 
Sabretooth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Wyoming, NY
Posts: 6,757
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
Then Sabre, show your understanding is worthy of your training.
I believe I have been doing so all along. Shall I ask my fellow forum members if I am incorrect in that statement?
__________________
--------------------------------------
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, 09:01 AM   #265
CharlesNorrie
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 101
Whatever your associates claim about you Sabre, is essentially your claim, but your understanding of my story does not impress me, but for some reason seems to bother you. If you don't like what I'm saying, I could direct you to any number of sites on model railways and the like.
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, 09:05 AM   #266
realdon
Scholar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 59
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
Realdon,

You don't convince me. Of course I do not have any knowledge of helicopter missions at around 7pm on 21 December 1988. It is the sort of fact the CIA would not let out.

You clearly know little about radar, and in principle radar waves travel to infinity unless they meet the ground or another object. I know that from my physics "O" level, now 45 years ago.

Just look at some of BB's television interviews.
Charles, I did not say anything about how far electromagnetic waves travel. Yes they travel for ever at the speed of light but they appear to weaken further away from their source and are overcome by noise/static and become undetectable. So to have a greater range a higher power output at the transmitter is required with more sensitive receivers.

David
realdon 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, 09:09 AM   #267
SpitfireIX
Philosopher
 
SpitfireIX's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana, USA
Posts: 6,119
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
The answer in the AAIB report, Sabre, is inadequate. No explanation is given as to why the break-up happened. I don't know why, but I can see dissimulation when I see it. It will cause me great sorrow when the AAIB (a very decent organisation) is challenged in their findings all to support the wrongdoings of a US state terrorist organisation.

Section 2.12.2.1

Quote:
Whilst it has not been possible to find a specific mechanism to explain the regions of localised skin separation and peel-back (i.e. the 'pressure blow' regions referred to in para 2.12.2), they were almost certainly the result of high intensity shock overpressures produced locally in those regions as a result of the additive recombination of shock waves transmitted through the lower hull cavities. It is considered that the relatively close proximity of the left side region of damage just below floor level at station 500, [Appendix B, Figure B-19, region D] to the forward end of the cargo hold may be significant insofar as the reflections back from the forward end of the hold would have produced a local enhancement of the shock overpressure. Similarly, 'endblockage effects' produced by the cargo door frame might have been responsible for local enhancements in the area of the belly skin separation and curl-back at station 560 [Appendix B, Figure B-19 and B-20, region E].

The separation of the large section of upper fuselage skin [Appendix B, Figure B-19 and B-20, detail B] was almost certainly associated with a local overpressure in the side cavities between the main deck window line and the upper deck floor, where the cavity is effectively closed off. It is considered that the most probable mechanism producing this region of impulse overpressure was a reflection from the closed end of the cavity, possibly combined with further secondary reflections from the window assembly, the whole being driven by reflective overpressures at the forward end of the longitudinal manifold cavity caused by the forward end of the cargo hold. The local overpressure inside the sidewall cavity would have been backed up by a general cabin overpressure resulting from the floor breakthrough, giving rise to an increased pressure acting on the inner face of the cabin side liner panels.This would have provided pseudo mass to the panels, effectively preventing them from moving inwards and allowing them to react [to] the impulse pressure within the cavity, producing the region of local high pressure evidenced by the region of quilting on the skin panels [Appendix B, Figure B-19, region C]. [typos due to text scanning corrected]

Please explain how the above discussion is not an explanation, and exactly what you feel constitutes "dissimulation" in the passage.

ETA: I see Charles has just earned 7 more days on "the naughty step."
__________________
"My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right."
--Carl Schurz

Last edited by SpitfireIX; 3rd September 2010 at 09:12 AM. Reason: Additional comment
SpitfireIX 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, 09:10 AM   #268
Rolfe
Adult human female
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 50,594
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
Whatever your associates claim about you Sabre, is essentially your claim, but your understanding of my story does not impress me, but for some reason seems to bother you. If you don't like what I'm saying, I could direct you to any number of sites on model railways and the like.

Charles, all this bickering and personalisation of the discussion advances your cause not an inch. You have failed to persuade anyone that there was a second explosion. You have failed to persuade anyone that baggage container AVE4041 was either present at Heathrow airport at midnight the night before, or identifiable as the container Bedford was required to select for the PA103 interline baggage during the afternoon. You have failed to persuade anyone that it was essential for any Iranian revenge for IA655 to be directly carried out by someone closely connected to that disaster.

This amounts to a fail. You are trying to persuade people in general of all these points, and you are simply not succeeding. You need to address the deficiencies in your argument, not snipe and belittle those who are trying to understand 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, 09:15 AM   #269
Rolfe
Adult human female
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 50,594
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
Professional qualifications are worth nothing as compared with the necessity of trying to think.

Not necessarily so. It is usually necessary to think to achieve these qualifications. And a layman may think until kingdom come about a subject he knows little about, and achieve nothing because of basic lack of knowledge and understanding.

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, 09:17 AM   #270
Sabretooth
No Ordinary Rabbit
 
Sabretooth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Wyoming, NY
Posts: 6,757
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
Whatever your associates claim about you Sabre, is essentially your claim, but your understanding of my story does not impress me, but for some reason seems to bother you. If you don't like what I'm saying, I could direct you to any number of sites on model railways and the like.
Charles - it has nothing to do with whether or not I "don't like what [your] saying". I am asking you for clarity. However, I'm not impressed with your constant dodging of my questions.

And I understand your story quite well...but at this point, a story is exactly what you are trying to pass off as fact.

I am asking you to prove your position. What evidence did you find that supports your story?

I've provided you with facts and sources to justify my disbelief. Now I ask that you return the gesture and provide some facts of your own to justify your position. This is how a civil debate is carried. But I'm sure you know this already.

Don't misconstrue my disbelief as "not understanding".
__________________
--------------------------------------
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, 09:17 AM   #271
realdon
Scholar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 59
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.
Jings now this. Please explain.

Are you suggesting "Hantzauman" had a device that was receiving and displaying a radar signal that was transmitted by the NATS radar ?

David
realdon 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, 09:23 AM   #272
Sabretooth
No Ordinary Rabbit
 
Sabretooth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Wyoming, NY
Posts: 6,757
Originally Posted by SpitfireIX View Post
ETA: I see Charles has just earned 7 more days on "the naughty step."
__________________
--------------------------------------
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, 09:24 AM   #273
Ambrosia
Good of the Fods
 
Ambrosia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,675
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
Please the read again my reasons for saying that there was more than one explosion.
I can't find any reasons other than.

i) there was more than 1 debris trail
ii) some of the wreckage was missing and not recovered

I was asking you to state them again so that perhaps I could understand them a little better. I hope that if/when you return to this forum after your suspension has elapsed you would indulge me and state them plainly once more for the record.

On your website you also claim as source material for John Parks[sic],

(it's actually John H Parkes. One wonders if your method to avoid libel is to intentionally misspell peoples names. It does make finding the source of your material awkward.)
"Notes of a video made by me from a video interview with John Parks. Notes made 6/10/09"

I would very much like to watch this interview, if such a thing is possible.

Last edited by Ambrosia; 3rd September 2010 at 09:25 AM.
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, 09:32 AM   #274
Rolfe
Adult human female
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 50,594
Originally Posted by SpitfireIX View Post
ETA: I see Charles has just earned 7 more days on "the naughty step."

Damn. Repeated incivility and ignoring mod warnings.

I certainly didn't report anything he posted today. I tried my best to show him how to use the quote function, including sending him a PM about it. I really, really didn't want him suspended again. And to go from 24 hours to 7 days in one leap suggests the mods weren't too happy with the way he was going.

What is it about twoofers? Doesn't seem to matter which aeroplane they're hung up about, they all seem to follow the same pattern.

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, 09:37 AM   #275
GlennB
Loggerheaded, earth-vexing fustilarian
 
GlennB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wales
Posts: 31,398
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post

You clearly know little about radar, and in principle radar waves travel to infinity unless they meet the ground or another object. I know that from my physics "O" level, now 45 years ago.
My physics 'O' level was 44 years ago. We learned about the inverse square law. The strength varies inversely with square of distance. Double the distance, 1/4 strength. 10x distance, 1/100th strength etc.

eta: too late.
GlennB 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, 09:47 AM   #276
Rolfe
Adult human female
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 50,594
My physics O grade (the Scottish equivalent) was only 41 years ago - is that a win or a lose? I got over 95% in it, too! Got an A grade in Higher physics 39 years ago. Got a distinction in pre-med physics at Glasgow University 38 years ago.

I still think that's all fairly irrelevant to the discussion. Higher degrees in engineering would be more impressive.

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, 04:56 PM   #277
Rolfe
Adult human female
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 50,594
I suppose this thread will just die for a week now. Damn.

Still, while we're waiting, could I expand on one point that got a bit lost earlier?

Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
I propose that the containers that arrived from NY mid afternoon of 20 December 1988 were trundled round the the baggage shed when empty and lined up.

Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
Er, you'll have to explain this. Which flight did these containers arrive on, mid afternoon on 20th December? What was the flight number, and which actual aeroplane was involved?

Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
I have answered all sensible questions put to me.

No Charles, you missed that one, and indeed all my questions about your imaginary baggage container system. This particular point suggests to me that you're labouring under a rather elementary misapprehension.

Charles has never described his container allocation system in detail, but it seems to involve every aircraft having a number of different sets of containers which are specific to that aircraft. Possibly three. So that at any time one set is in use and the other two are on the ground.

Right away we can see the flaw here. Three times as many containers as are needed in the air at any time. This is expensive and wasteful of resources. An efficient system would seek to minimise investment in equipment that would just be lying around, and to have containers in the air for as high a proportion of the time as possible. It would also incur extra expense as regards provision of sufficient storage facilities on the ground to take all this stuff. Another consideration is the man-hours lost rooting around for the right set of containers in the context of large numbers of the things being stored on the ground for varying lengths of time.

However, there's another reason this system is a nonsense, at least as Charles seems to be imagining it. He seems to think every airliner only ever shuttles between two airports, like a cable-car or a yo-yo. I think he's imagining three sets of containers, with one in the air and one at each of the two airports.

Of course planes don't fly like that. Even on a normal schedule, planes frequently don't go back to the airport they came from. Never mind when schedules are disrupted for some reason! If every plane was using only its own containers, it would mean it had to have a set at every airport in the world, plus one! Who's going to pay for all that, and the storage?

Why do I think Charles believes that? I think that was the explanation he partly gave on Robert Black's blog. And also, that comment about the containers having "arrived from NY mid afternoon of 20 December 1988". Huh? As he seems to think that the container sets are tied to the actual planes, I can only imagine that he thinks that Maid of the Seas flew in from NY, mid-afternoon on 20th December.

Where does he get that idea from? Again, I can only imagine he's working on this yo-yo idea, and also thinks the plane flew in to Heathrow from NY mid-afternoon on 21st December.

Originally Posted by Fatal Accident Inquiry
(7) That the aircraft involved arrived at Heathrow at about 1210 hours on 21 December 1988 from San Francisco and was under constant guard until it left Heathrow as Flight 103 that evening.

Not mid-afteroon - and not New York actually. Maid of the Seas flew in from San Fransisco about noon on 21st December.

This was why I was asking Charles what flight and what plane he was imagining these containers flew in on, mid-afternoon on 20th December from NY. I think he imagines it was Maid of the Seas, and it simply can't have been, if that plane only landed from SF (an 11-hour flight or something like that) at noon on the 21st. It would have taken off from SF about 1am GMT on the 21st. It's physically impossible for it to have landed at Heathrow less than 12 hours before that!

If Charles runs to form on this, I suspect he'll decide that flights are paired to keep to his plan, it's just that it isn't the same actual plane each time. This might be a bit more sensible, but in that case, why on earth would any such system hold a set of luggage containers on the ground for over 24 hours (mid-afternoon on the 20th to 6pm on the 21st), when flights were landing and taking off several times a day?

This is what I mean when I say Charles hasn't done his reading, doesn't have a command of the essential facts, and is simply making stuff up rather than thinking his thesis through.

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 4th September 2010, 10:05 AM   #278
Rolfe
Adult human female
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 50,594
Originally Posted by sabretooth47 View Post
To offer yet another source:

Source: http://www.ntsb.org/Wiringcargodoor/...artapA-N_1.pdf

I never saw that before, Sabretooth. Thanks for that.

Rolfe.

ETA: Ooooh, it's another CT! Way different from Charles's, and it seems to be in the class of "it was really an accident", similar to the Parkes story. This guy seems to think it was an accidental explosive decompression due to a faulty cargo door, and the apparent evidence of the IED due to "a rather large shotgun" being present in the luggage container, loaded, which went off as a result of the accident. That's new!
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.

Last edited by Rolfe; 4th September 2010 at 10:39 AM.
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 4th September 2010, 11:58 AM   #279
Soapy Sam
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 28,766
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
I suppose this thread will just die for a week now. Damn.
I generally stay out of CT and reading this convinces me I'm wise. A week or a year from now, this guy will still be spouting nonsense and ignoring or being rude to anyone who disagrees with him. Why bother?
Quote:


This is what I mean when I say Charles hasn't done his reading, doesn't have a command of the essential facts, and is simply making stuff up rather than thinking his thesis through.

Rolfe.
Furthermore, he can't tell a web board from a blog, he can't or won't learn how to use the quote function, he writes incomprehensibly and he doesn't think too clearly. He is pretty obviously headed for a ban in fairly short order, as he will continue to be abusive and to ignore mod instruction. He will ascribe this to CIA influence. (I'm fairly sure Darat is MI6 myself. I mean, English and gay- stands to reason. And Randi is a perfidious Yank as well- case closed!)
So what makes him worth the trouble?
Soapy Sam 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 4th September 2010, 12:35 PM   #280
SpitfireIX
Philosopher
 
SpitfireIX's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana, USA
Posts: 6,119
Originally Posted by Soapy Sam View Post
I generally stay out of CT and reading this convinces me I'm wise. A week or a year from now, this guy will still be spouting nonsense and ignoring or being rude to anyone who disagrees with him. Why bother?

Furthermore, he can't tell a web board from a blog, he can't or won't learn how to use the quote function, he writes incomprehensibly and he doesn't think too clearly. He is pretty obviously headed for a ban in fairly short order, as he will continue to be abusive and to ignore mod instruction. He will ascribe this to CIA influence. (I'm fairly sure Darat is MI6 myself. I mean, English and gay- stands to reason. And Randi is a perfidious Yank as well- case closed!)
So what makes him worth the trouble?

I and others have addressed this question here and elsewhere, both online and in the real world. For most of us, the answer is, we don't expect to convince the true believers of the error of their ways; we know that's virtually impossible. Rather, we do it for the benefit of the uninformed who might be exposed to conspiracist garbage and wonder whether there's any truth to it. We are quite confident that as long as we make an effort to present the truth, it will win out eventually.

Also, for me personally, I see conspiracists as [Rule 10]ing on the graves of, variously, the Americans (and Japanese) killed at Pearl Harbor; JFK and Patrolman J.D. Tippit; all of the astronauts who have given their lives in pursuit of the exploration of space; and all of the victims of the various terrorist attacks that have become fodder for conspiracy theories. This angers me, and I feel an obligation to attempt to call attention to this behavior.

ETA: I don't consider Holocaust denial to be a form of conspiracism, even though the two phenomena appear superficially similar, and there is certainly a significant amount of crossover. Deniers are in a special category of particular loathing and contempt.
__________________
"My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right."
--Carl Schurz

Last edited by SpitfireIX; 4th September 2010 at 12:47 PM. Reason: Additional Comment
SpitfireIX 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

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 10:20 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2024, 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.