Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

 International Skeptics Forum A message from JDX/Rob Balsamo of Pilots for truth

 Notices IMPORTANT: JREF Forums is now the International Skeptics Forum. If you are a past member of the JREF Forums you must agree to the new terms and conditions to post, send PMs, or continue to use the forum as a member. You can view them here, or you will be presented with them when you try to make a post or PM or similar. Your private information was removed in transferring to the new forum. If you'd like to import it please see the instructions in this thread to approve transfer. If you are having problems accessing the Forum you can contact Darat at isforum@internationalskeptics.com, please include your username and forum email address in any email. NOTE:** TAPATALK access is currently disabled **. This is just while we work out how to ensure people have to agree to the T&Cs before posting here via Tapatalk

 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 911 conspiracy theory , flight 77 , johndoex , rob balsamo

 21st March 2007, 04:40 PM #81 jaydeehess Penultimate Amazing     Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 15,231 Originally Posted by apathoid Put any aircraft into a 6000fpm dive, there will be lag on the altitude data.. Was Flt 77 in such a dive? That's 100 fps. Forward velocity was said to be 500 MPH which is 733 fps If 733 fps is taken to be velocity along the path of the aircraft sine-1(100/733) = 7.84 degrees glide slope If it is to be ground speed then tan-1(100/733) = 7.76 degrees I thought it came in at 4 degrees I thought that the pressure altitude problem would be more that the air flow over the craft would be out of the parameters for certification due to its going well over Vmo and not due to its dropping too fast. (though certainly that would also cause a problem as per Mad(flt) Scientist's post. The instruments were simply never designed to read properly at that altitude and while the aircraft was going that fast. Last edited by jaydeehess; 21st March 2007 at 04:44 PM.
 21st March 2007, 04:51 PM #83 Anti-sophist Graduate Poster     Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 1,542 Originally Posted by jaydeehess sine-1(100/733) = 7.84 degrees glide slope If it is to be ground speed then tan-1(100/733) = 7.76 degrees I thought it came in at 4 degree You are being somewhat overly precise. It varies a fair amount. For example, the pitch angle of the plane (which isn't quite the number you want)... varies from like -8.5 to -4 during the last 10 seconds or so of recorded data. __________________ A witty saying proves nothing. -Voltaire
 21st March 2007, 05:05 PM #84 beachnut Penultimate Amazing     Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Dog House Posts: 22,264 Originally Posted by jaydeehess Was Flt 77 in such a dive? That's 100 fps. Forward velocity was said to be 500 MPH which is 733 fps If 733 fps is taken to be velocity along the path of the aircraft sine-1(100/733) = 7.84 degrees glide slope If it is to be ground speed then tan-1(100/733) = 7.76 degrees I thought it came in at 4 degrees I thought that the pressure altitude problem would be more that the air flow over the craft would be out of the parameters for certification due to its going well over Vmo and not due to its dropping too fast. (though certainly that would also cause a problem as per Mad(flt) Scientist's post. The instruments were simply never designed to read properly at that altitude and while the aircraft was going that fast. Pilots use some extimates like the 60 to 1 rule. Take the 600 feet and you would have 50 feet lost at 5 degrees. It works for small angles. 60 to 1. If you are 60 miles away and one degree off course you are 1 mile off course. Your 100 feet per second, at 733 feet per second is about 8 degrees using a quick 60 to 1 rule. But the real formula works great and the pitch angle on the FDR may not be the angle the plane makes in space.
 21st March 2007, 05:30 PM #85 jaydeehess Penultimate Amazing     Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 15,231 Originally Posted by Anti-sophist You are being somewhat overly precise. It varies a fair amount. For example, the pitch angle of the plane (which isn't quite the number you want)... varies from like -8.5 to -4 during the last 10 seconds or so of recorded data. Point taken. The calcs I did would be only for the short time that the aircraft was doing those exact rates of course. Yes, I know that an 8 degree desent would be steep. I used to (25 years ago) do the PM's and repair on ILS systems and other nav-aids. DME are accurate to within 1/10 nautical mile so that gives another source of error to the position data.(I worked on DME/VOR and TACAN as well) I do also understand the idea of the time lag in having the parameters recorded on the FDR and that the FDR's main function is to illustrate what occured to when an aircraft leaves normal flight and not so much to accurately record the non-standard flight up to the crash. It would be interesting to compare this FDR with those of aircraft that crashed at high speeds and out of control such as the Air Alaska aircraft that crashed due to a broken shaft in the tail trim or horz. stabilizer(I forget which-same result)
 21st March 2007, 05:47 PM #86 apathoid Government Loyalist     Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 2,787 Originally Posted by beachnut I look at the FDR and it confirms the wind form about 330 degrees at 5 to 10 knots. This is why the plane was heading 70 degreees but the ground track was 71.4 degrees, the plane was being blown sideways. I have now the FDR confirming the WX reports saved and looked up by JDX. Thank you JDX. Yes truthers always have some facts but not to support their ideas. That is a 61.2 true track and a true heading of 58.8 true heading. Speaking of the true track, one might ask themselves how that lines up with the damage.. ...pretty well as you can see, and far better than I expected. All I did here was insert placemarks over each of the downed poles and the impact area, took a screen cap, then rotated the canvas exactly 61.2 degrees in photoshop, used the selection box to draw a perfectly straight line over the impact placemark, and cropped. At least they managed to fake something right. __________________ Nature abhors a moron. -H.L. Mencken Last edited by apathoid; 21st March 2007 at 05:50 PM.
 22nd March 2007, 01:49 AM #89 Mr.D Self Assessed Dunning-Kruger Expert     Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 1,178 Originally Posted by beachnut Modern compass systems work very well. Ugh. Shoulda done one more round of editing/proofreading. The analogy I had in mind was the inertial lag on an old style hand held cub-scout magnetic compass - which is little more than a magnet floating in a sealed disk filled with water.(Ten years ago I worked with some solid-state accelerometers and tiltometers. The accelerometers turned out to be useless for us; there was a slight lag time characteristic of them (I don't remember the details). One of the natural harmonic periods in the system turned out to be too close to a mutiple of the measurement lag.) I don't know what the state of the art is with respect to avionics equipment, but I am assuming that at extremes outside the normal operating parameters that there are some very large systematics in the measurments. I'm totally guessing about systematics (what else other than lag? A high pressure front causing a 'prepulse' type effect?) in time.
 22nd March 2007, 05:35 AM #90 Anti-sophist Graduate Poster     Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 1,542 Originally Posted by Mr.D I'm totally guessing about systematics (what else other than lag? A high pressure front causing a 'prepulse' type effect?) in time. http://www.allstar.fiu.edu/aero/PSSI.htm http://www.allstar.fiu.edu/aero/PSI.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pitot-static_system To answer your question in a shorter way, there are at least two kinds of error. Hysterisis (or transient error) is what we typically talk about when we say "lag". This error causes a lag that keeps the altimeter from 'keeping up' with the plane during rapid changes. There would also be some steady-state (or positional) error. This is the error that exists once you give the altimeter time to "level-off" and catch up with a plane who's altitude isn't changing. __________________ A witty saying proves nothing. -Voltaire
 30th March 2007, 02:39 AM #92 JAStewart Graduate Poster Tagger     Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 1,523 Originally Posted by jaydeehess jdx has replied to my second post in that thread. As expected: It appears I am banned. ,,, and I never even questioned his findings about the FDR. All I did was suggest a new tact for getting his message out. Freedom of speech, Rob Balsamo style. Quench even the hint of dissent. Not sure why he thought I was JAStewart. I am registerd there as JAStewart :P just shows his attention to detail __________________ Ignorance and google is a horrible combination. - BigAl Argumentum ad YouTubeum - sts60
 30th March 2007, 03:14 AM #93 pagan Critical Thinker   Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 399 Gravy: Your (and others in your group) whole life seems to be dedicated to battle us truthers. At the same time you compare us with ufo fantasists, bigfooters and moonhoaxers etc. I think we have a discrepancy here. Because I suppose you're not going after the bigfooters? Perhaps, our "illusions" are more dangerous? Our actions can actually stop the war in the ME and the coming attack on Iran? And you and your comrades don't like that? You want the Americans to keep the war going, to secure the oil supply or whatever?
 30th March 2007, 03:33 AM #94 uk_dave Philosopher   Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 7,855 You JAQing off again pagan?
 30th March 2007, 03:36 AM #95 pagan Critical Thinker   Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 399 Originally Posted by uk_dave You JAQing off again pagan? Yep, did you cum too?
 30th March 2007, 04:54 AM #99 Gravy Downsitting Citizen     Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 17,078 Originally Posted by pagan Gravy: Your (and others in your group) whole life seems to be dedicated to battle us truthers. At the same time you compare us with ufo fantasists, bigfooters and moonhoaxers etc. I think we have a discrepancy here. No, we just have a normal pagan lie here. Rational adults know that if you have to lie to support your arguments, there's something wrong with your arguments. __________________ "Please, keep your chops cool and don’t overblow.” –Freddie Hubbard What's the Harm?........Stop Sylvia Browne........My 9/11 links
 30th March 2007, 04:55 AM #100 Panoply_Prefect Graduate Poster     Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Sweden Posts: 1,075 I know JDX has declined to have anything but a telephone debate, however the Holocaustsphere, or whattyawannacallit, had a debate were both sides actually agreed how to go about it. It was fascinating to follow, with multiple participants on both teams. Worth a look imho: http://p102.ezboard.com/The-Scholars...odohforumfrm23 It would be very interesting to see such a debate for the 911-ummm..sphere. Using the same rules and procedures, it could actually be a huge debate. Cheers, S Last edited by Panoply_Prefect; 30th March 2007 at 05:00 AM.
 30th March 2007, 05:25 AM #101 westprog Philosopher     Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 8,928 Originally Posted by pagan Our actions can actually stop the war in the ME and the coming attack on Iran? And you and your comrades don't like that? You want the Americans to keep the war going, to secure the oil supply or whatever? In fact, the TM is of some benefit to GWB. The stupidity of the theories is so obvious, that it has pretty well prevented any serious investigation into the failings of 9/11. I once facetiously suggested that the entire TM was set up by the Bush administration as a smokescreen. I don't really believe it, but it certainly serves a purpose for them.
 30th March 2007, 05:51 AM #102 Gravy Downsitting Citizen     Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 17,078 Originally Posted by westprog In fact, the TM is of some benefit to GWB. You got that right. While I'll bet very few people have been converted to activists against the Bush administration by the "truth" movement, many people who are predisposed against Bush have kept themselves from doing anything productive about that because they're spending countless hours hunting squibs and reading works of fantasy written by fools. What a waste. __________________ "Please, keep your chops cool and don’t overblow.” –Freddie Hubbard What's the Harm?........Stop Sylvia Browne........My 9/11 links
 30th March 2007, 06:01 AM #103 aggle-rithm Ardent Formulist     Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 15,336 Originally Posted by Gravy No, we just have a normal pagan lie here. Rational adults know that if you have to lie to support your arguments, there's something wrong with your arguments. From the CT viewpoint, though, getting the "truth" out is so important that they can't be bothered with puny ethical considerations such as whether the "truth" is true or not. No, don't try and figure it out. It takes a special sort of mind. __________________ To understand recursion, you must first understand recursion. Woo's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be adequately explained by aliens.
 30th March 2007, 06:09 AM #104 westprog Philosopher     Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 8,928 Originally Posted by Gravy You got that right. While I'll bet very few people have been converted to activists against the Bush administration by the "truth" movement, many people who are predisposed against Bush have kept themselves from doing anything productive about that because they're spending countless hours hunting squibs and reading works of fantasy written by fools. What a waste. If nothing else, the CT's have muddied the waters sufficiently that there is much less prospect of a coherent investigation into how 911 came to happen. That is their only real achievement.
 30th March 2007, 06:23 AM #106 Gravy Downsitting Citizen     Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 17,078 Originally Posted by westprog If nothing else, the CT's have muddied the waters sufficiently that there is much less prospect of a coherent investigation into how 911 came to happen. That is their only real achievement. Indeed, although allow me to suggest "another coherent investigation" as being more accurate. __________________ "Please, keep your chops cool and don’t overblow.” –Freddie Hubbard What's the Harm?........Stop Sylvia Browne........My 9/11 links
 30th March 2007, 06:34 AM #107 westprog Philosopher     Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 8,928 Originally Posted by Gravy Indeed, although allow me to suggest "another coherent investigation" as being more accurate. I think the investigation as to how the hijackings took place, how the buildings collapsed, and how Al-Quaeda are operating was coherent, useful and correct. What is less clear is how CIA support for the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan helped the rise of militant Islam. How the Israelis promoted the rise of Hamas and Islamism to subvert the PLO. How the support of the USA for the corrupt Saudi regime led Osama to see them as his primary enemy once the Soviets left Afghanistan. These are all fuzzy, tricky issues, and they span many years. There is nothing obvious there - I certainly don't know if all the points I made are valid, or what weight to attach to them. I do know that they are far more interesting areas for investigation than exactly how WTC7 came to collapse.
 30th March 2007, 06:57 AM #108 Gravy Downsitting Citizen     Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 17,078 I agree, westprog. Those are the questions I'd most like to see answered. I'd love to have a look at the 28 redacted pages in the Joint Intelligence Committee report, which may have more to say about US-Saudi relations than either government is comfortable with. I wonder how much of such a foreign policy* investigation could or would be allowed to see the light of day and how much would be classified as national security secrets. *(And domestic, since energy policy is related.) __________________ "Please, keep your chops cool and don’t overblow.” –Freddie Hubbard What's the Harm?........Stop Sylvia Browne........My 9/11 links
 30th March 2007, 07:44 AM #109 Lurker Illuminator     Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 4,187 It is intersting seeing JDX disavow any claims about the Pentagon he made in the past when it comes to an upcoming debate. Note how he makes sure to get Gravy's claim set in stone. The reason is simple, by having Gravy claim that the plane hit the Pentagon and JDX making no claims, it falls on Gravy to prove his claim, not on JDX to prove anything else. It is much easier to poke holes in someone else's claim than to prove your own. Basic debate tactic and clearly JDX wants Gravy on the defensive rather than himself having to defend his own claims. Lurker
 30th March 2007, 08:01 AM #110 Panoply_Prefect Graduate Poster     Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Sweden Posts: 1,075 Originally Posted by Lurker It is intersting seeing JDX disavow any claims about the Pentagon he made in the past when it comes to an upcoming debate. Note how he makes sure to get Gravy's claim set in stone. The reason is simple, by having Gravy claim that the plane hit the Pentagon and JDX making no claims, it falls on Gravy to prove his claim, not on JDX to prove anything else. It is much easier to poke holes in someone else's claim than to prove your own. Basic debate tactic and clearly JDX wants Gravy on the defensive rather than himself having to defend his own claims. Lurker A very valid point. Which explains why so many truthers are so afraid of actually commiting to a theory of their own. Instead they hide behind the "Im just asking questions" -shield. /S
 30th March 2007, 09:24 AM #111 westprog Philosopher     Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 8,928 Originally Posted by Gravy I agree, westprog. Those are the questions I'd most like to see answered. I'd love to have a look at the 28 redacted pages in the Joint Intelligence Committee report, which may have more to say about US-Saudi relations than either government is comfortable with. I wonder how much of such a foreign policy* investigation could or would be allowed to see the light of day and how much would be classified as national security secrets. *(And domestic, since energy policy is related.) The irritating thing is that the CT's really aren't interested in any of that stuff. Things that might really catch out the government, or justify their actions, aren't even on the radar. It's massive self-deception as to what is and what isn't relevant.
 30th March 2007, 10:52 AM #112 beachnut Penultimate Amazing     Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Dog House Posts: 22,264 Originally Posted by pagan Gravy: Your (and others in your group) whole life seems to be dedicated to battle us truthers. At the same time you compare us with ufo fantasists, bigfooters and moonhoaxers etc. I think we have a discrepancy here. Because I suppose you're not going after the bigfooters? Perhaps, our "illusions" are more dangerous? Our actions can actually stop the war in the ME and the coming attack on Iran? And you and your comrades don't like that? You want the Americans to keep the war going, to secure the oil supply or whatever? This is about 9/11 CT. You must of missed the anti war forum. This is about JDX who also is void of fact like you on 9/11. Wrong thread, wrong forum, still no facts. Thank you Quote: Our actions can actually stop the war in the ME and the coming attack on Iran? No, idiots making up lies about 9/11 can not stop the war. They can just look dumb. (you should go to Iraq and protest the people blowing up their own people; but then you are just a CTer with no facts, not an action man, a talk man) Last edited by beachnut; 30th March 2007 at 11:04 AM.
 30th March 2007, 10:56 AM #113 jaydeehess Penultimate Amazing     Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 15,231 Originally Posted by Lurker It is intersting seeing JDX disavow any claims about the Pentagon he made in the past when it comes to an upcoming debate. . On P4T I have witnessed on several occassions, a poster refer to CT theories that were expressed on the P4T forums only to have jdx basically respond that P4T makes no claim of a theory. This seems to be done in order to attempt to shut down any non-CT arguement. jdx does not make the same response to theories put forth by anyone who is a CT. The prime example is jdx's reluctance(actually I have never witnessed at all) to rein in one George Hayduke, who does indeed post some far fetched senarios that he declares are true. JDX has never objected to anyone, for instance, claiming that the damage to the Pentagon is consistent with a missile. I even pointed out how the adamage is inconsistent with any missile theory. I was then attacked by jdx who said that real evidence is examining the FDR. No mention by jdx that Geo.H. offered no plausible evidence.
 30th March 2007, 10:57 AM #114 rwguinn Philosopher     Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: 16 miles from 7 lakes Posts: 9,622 Originally Posted by pagan <>> I think we have a discrepancy here. Because I suppose you're not going after the bigfooters? Perhaps, our "illusions" are more dangerous? Our actions can actually stop the war in the ME and the coming attack on Iran? And you and your comrades don't like that? ? Oh, we do That's a wholly different forum... __________________ "Political correctness is a doctrine,...,which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end." "I pointed out that his argument was wrong in every particular, but he rightfully took me to task for attacking only the weak points." Myriad http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=6853275#post6853275 Last edited by rwguinn; 30th March 2007 at 10:58 AM. Reason: fixed link
 30th March 2007, 06:03 PM #115 Obviousman Muse     Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 652 It's good to see even the LC admins can see what JDX is up to: http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Ch...showtopic=6390 __________________ Any time it can be proved that one of my studies is wrong, I am more eager than anyone to acknowledge AND CORRECT IT. Jack White Little White Lies.......
 30th March 2007, 08:09 PM #116 jaydeehess Penultimate Amazing     Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 15,231 Originally Posted by Obviousman It's good to see even the LC admins can see what JDX is up to: http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Ch...showtopic=6390 Could you be more specific for those of us bad, bad people whose IP addresses are banned from veiwing LC.
 30th March 2007, 08:48 PM #118 DavidJames Philosopher   Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Front Range, CO Posts: 8,732 I love it, JDX is pissed off at CTist "just asking questions" JDX, you are the best thing we having to fight the tin hat CTists. I would like to personally thank you for personifying the intellectual dishonesty and moral bankruptcy that is the "truth movement". You are doing more to expose the the "truth movement" for it's dishonesty, hypocrisy and self serving ego trips then JREF ever could. Thank You JDX. __________________ I will no longer respond to those who choose to have tools of murder as their avatars. Everyone is a skeptic except, of course, for the stuff that they believe Beaver Hateman: Is your argument that human life loses value proportionate to the number of humans available? Malcolm Kirkpatrick: That's part of the argument. Value is determined by supply and demand. Last edited by DavidJames; 30th March 2007 at 08:50 PM.
 30th March 2007, 10:01 PM #120 jaydeehess Penultimate Amazing     Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 15,231 Yeah, it becomes ever more clear that I was never going to get anywhere with jdx unless and only if I left my intellect at the door and proclaimed my absolute acceptance of all of his claims. ,,,,, and this guy wonders why no one wants a verbal debate with him. He regards any questioning of his work as a personal attack.

International Skeptics Forum

 Bookmarks Digg del.icio.us StumbleUpon Google Reddit