"I seldom interrupt people when they're talking; especially when they are inventing complicated lies, because they are often far more interesting than the truth. However, for you I'll make an exception..."
--- Len Deighton, Horse Under Water
Rob Balsamo, co-founder of Pilots for 9/11 Truth, tried to hijack a guitar newsgroup and fly it into the ground.
Which he missed.
No casualties are reported, as most guitarists were able to wrest control of their minds away from the intruder before any lasting damage was done.
This is a first-person, eyewitness narrative account of an attack by humorless zealots who, armed with little more than fanatical faith in their cause and intellect, launched a sudden and devastating assault against both.
When you conduct a major investigation, you cannot possibly answer every question, you just do the best you can. But for every question you leave unanswered, you create an opening to a conspiracy theory, and a good many of them have popped up here.
--- Lee Hamilton, co-chair of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, in an interview with Evan Solomon of CBC News, 21 August 2006
The 9/11 truth movement began as an honorable and patriotic response to the US government's attempts to limit the scope of the 9/11 Commission, to impede its investigations, and to ignore its recommendations. Although most of the commission's records are still neither accessible to the general public nor subject to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), we know some government agencies and officials were more concerned to hide evidence of their incompetence than to tell the truth to the 9/11 Commission or to the public.
Although the entire civilized world closed ranks with the United States against the terrorists, the US government squandered this good will by
As it became clear that this government should not be trusted on any issue that matters, many citizens began to wonder why they should trust conclusions drawn by the 9/11 Commission.
Among some of the 9/11 truth movement's leaders, that distrust has escalated into a mad competition to see who can come up with the battiest ideas of how the US government might have faked or perpetrated the 9/11 attacks, while pinning the blame on Osama Bin Laden and al-Qaeda just to have an excuse to invade Afghanistan and Iraq.
Why legions of American eyewitnesses, journalists, investigators, and government workers would have collaborated in the perpetration and cover-up of such violence has never been satisfactorily explained.
You won't see any of this explored in 9/11 Truth lore, because the "conspiracy" they're describing is impossible everywhere outside a Zucker brothers movie -- unbelievably stupid in its conception, pointlessly baroque and excessive in its particulars, but flawless in its execution, with no concrete evidence left behind and tens of thousands keeping their roles a secret forever.
--- Matt Taibbi, The Low Post: I, Left Gatekeeper
Those who peddle fringe theories about 9/11 stay in business via an artful dodge: it is the government's job to explain what happened, not theirs.
"We do not offer theory or point blame", say the Pilots for 9/11 Truth. "However, we are focused on determining the truth of that fateful day based on solid data and facts...".
As engineers and scientists know, however, data are slippery critters made out of signal and noise. The primary method we use to decide whether to accept data, allegations, or conclusions as fact is to test whether they fit together with other data and facts into a consistent and plausible theory. Without the help of theories, we would have little basis for accepting anything as fact.
We have determined based on the Flight Data Recorder information that has been analyzed thus far provided by the NTSB, that it is impossible for this aircraft to have struck down the light poles.
--- Pilots for 911 Truth, 20 August 2006
Yet the light poles were struck down, and a dozen or so witnesses actually saw the aircraft strike them down.
The no-757-ever-hit-the-Pentagon crowd will tell you the light poles could have been struck down beforehand, or blown up by a carefully timed sequence of Hollywood-style explosions, or knocked down by a missile or second plane that was painted to look like an American Airlines Boeing 757.
Furthermore all of the eyewitnesses could have been wrong or lying or smoking whatever the no-757 folks are smoking.
And let's not forget that the Flight Data Recorder (FDR) found inside the Pentagon could have been planted amongst the wreckage just to fool us into thinking a Boeing 757 flew over the Pentagon instead of hitting it.
Or maybe the reason for planting the FDR, along with other wreckage of a Boeing 757 and personal items belonging to Flight 77 passengers and crew, notably organic material containing their DNA, was to convince the world that the Pentagon was hit by Flight 77. If so, then the joke is certainly on the conspirators, who were able to make Flight 77 vanish into thin air but were unable to come up with an FDR that would fool the brave and clever Pilots for 911 Truth.
Of course, it would be irresponsible of us to neglect the very real possibility that Flight 77, with all its passengers and crew, was simply plucked out of the sky by extraterrestrials.
Whatever we do, we must never be so rude as to mention the idea that Pilots for 911 Truth might have drawn an incorrect conclusion. What they say is Fact, not Theory.
You're welcome Michael. Yes, some of these people may actually be paid by the Pentagon as "Bloggers" in order to sow confusion, set up strawmans and switch topics in order to discredit the original topic. Case in point, Clinger switching to the cell phone topic due to the fact he is unable to address the Flight Data Recorder/Press Release in the original post. It appears there are about 2-4 "Govt loyalists" on that thread who have an agenda.
--- Rob Balsamo, opening words of his very first post on
rec.music.classical.guitar, 25 June 2008
Yes, Rob Balsamo posted that to a guitar newsgroup.
If the Pentagon has been paying bloggers to sow confusion about Flight 77 in guitar newsgroups, then my fellow professors who complain about how hard it is to get DoD funding for their research are definitely in the wrong business.
To be fair, Rob's argument does not entirely depend upon the idea that all who question his conclusions are paid or unpaid agents of an unfathomably immoral government. He is also willing to entertain the idea that we are unfathomably stupid and uninformed.
For example:
Some people here really need to get better research skills.
The fact some of you are trying to turn a basic problem into something it isnt shows your desperation and perhaps agenda to sow confusion...
The rest of your post i didnt bother to read as its clear your strawmans are getting more desperate.
Let see what you got amature.
And you didnt "drag" me into this my friend. I have some free time while rendering scenes for our latest production and i enjoy showing the public how some people go out of their way to make excuses.
I love exposing these idiots. No worries MT... im having fun. :-) MT, the people here are way behind the times with their arguments.. .and WAY out of their league. Stick around folks.. .watch them go down in flames... :-)
"Pentagon Bloggers" here? Or just extreme denial looking for any opportinuty to confuse... let the reader decide.
All others with a brain, i suggest you dont waste your time with the extreme bias shown here by some.. which apparently not only cloud their judgement, but prove to have them remain in denial. Either that.. or they are paid "bloggers" by the pentagon as described in links above. I certainly hope they are getting paid, as it easier to accept them actually spending their free time on such weak arguments rather than actually being such losers.
Honestly Robert... i can care less what people "in this forum" think.
Robert (and others), we record the FBI. You are all out of your league.
Get up to speed Clinger.
Richard, read the post above yours and get up to speed.
You're a fraud.
Capt, i suggest you get your money back from the Cracker Jack box that gave you your flight decoder ring and Capt status.
You just dont have the apptitude and are nothing but a troll seeking attention. Ie, a loser.
Will, you really need to get up to speed.
Its because he doesnt havbe a clue.. just like Slo, Andy and Will.
If you havent noticed (which is apparent you havent) This thread is about True Altitude, pressure altitude (soon to be radar altitude) and the Flight Data Recorder information provided by the NTSB which does not support the govt story. It also has morphed into exposing those who claim to be a pilot yet dont have a clue of the above even when provided source links for study, yet continue to argue in circles.
Please quote one theory from http://pilotsfor911truth.org. Again, it appears your lack of observation is shining through again. Please pay particular attention to the underlined sentence atop our home page, and the white bold letters atop our forum. Note the difference Einstein.
I dont think you're a paid pentagon blogger Andy, your arguments are too weak. You're just not very observant and use endless strawmans.
(in case you are too literal, that was sarcasm... again, you're not too observant, so i felt the need for this disclaimer)
Its not surprising some will attack our support structure when they run out of arguments and/or dont understand the original topic. We seen it many times from the weak minded. But keep trying! :-)
Ohhhh.. thats right. You buy whatever the govt tells you.. hook, line and sinker...
The "other investigator" is a janitor. Farmer doesnt have a clue.... Farmer used to consult with me for his work, but once his ego got to be too much after i tried to explain DME to him, he kinda lost it.
If you wish to believe Farmer, you are certainly entitled, but as i said, dont be surprised if you see his whole blog disappear as precedent is set for such an occassion. Farmer makes ALOT of mistakes, has never stepped into a cockpit, and has not consulted with any Aircraft Accident Investigator or FDR Expert....
Forgive me if i dont reply to further correspondence from you on this forum as it is clear you still have not done your homework, have an extreme bias for the govt story which leads you to believe a janitor (other investigators) and someone who never stepped into a cockpit (Farmer) over these people...
MT, as i said before... dont bother. Its clear Will still cant grasp the fact of "cannot exceed 0.5 seconds".
I will reply here one more time to expose Will's intellectual dishonesty. Will is trying to spin this into something it is not to confuse the reader (or Will just truly doesnt have a clue). It is also clear Will hasnt opened the csv file.
For example, Will is using the term "interval" while we are describing buffer lag time in order to make a case for "mathmatecal impossibility". It is clear Will either doesnt understand the problem at hand, or is intentionally confusing the reader.
Will, your intellectual dishonesty has gone over the top as not even duhbunkers try to spin this into your attempted argument.
As for "peer-reviewed" papers. Again, would you submit a paper on 2+2=4 for peer review? The reason Farmer is writing up convoluted papers filled with error and mistakes (he still hasnt a clue of margin for error true vs radar alt, nor a clue of slant range) is because he is offering the theory that the FDR is missing 6 seconds....
We dont need to write up a simple math problem into a peer reviewed paper. But we did write up several press releases with our names, face and professional reputations signed which were distributed globally.
Feel free to make up any excuse you wish, or come up with any theory you wish in order to preserve your denial, cognitive dissonance, or apathy. The facts speak for themselves.
Someone needs to direct Will back to the numberous lessons on pressure altitude, altimeter simulator and contact information for NTSB in this thread as its clear he still doesnt get the facts. Either that, or someone needs to teach Will 2+2=4 again before he moves onto pressure altitude vs. true.
Will just doesnt care to do his homework and listens to a janitor and a blogger who has a reputation for deleting his entire blog due to numerous mistakes who has never stepped foot in a cockpit.
How many "peers" does Farmer or your Janitor have on his side? A Cell phone technician and anonymous "duhbunkers"? Anyone with aviation experience? If so, please give them my contact info as i would love to talk to them about DME, True/Pressure/Radar Altitude and FDR buffer lag.
Yeah, i figured. Seems to be a common theme among those who support the govt story. Inability to do their homework and/or research. But if anything comes along which seems to support the govt story, all "critical thinking" skills are tossed out the window.
I really hate getting roped into this internet debates and prefer to do it over a recorded debate....
It is clear who is more confident of their material. If i were such a "fraud", "misleading", "lack expertise" in my work, certainly a guy like Will would take up any challenge on a recorded debate to put me in my place. A guy like Will should be able to do it rather rapidly according to his claims.. no? But, it seems Will makes excuse to only debate from behind his screen. Just like the other numerous cowards.
Bottom line.. Will is making excuse to not have a recorded debate so he doesnt get humiliated in front of a much larger audience than on this guitar forum. Most who are already his allies. That is the definition of cowardice.
--- Rob Balsamo, extracted from his 53 posts to
rec.music.classical.guitar, 25 June to 29 June 2008
That is almost, but not quite, a good summary of Rob Balsamo's argument.
The following sequence of posts, which came near the end of Rob Balsamo's participation in the guitar newsgroup he invaded, complete the picture by showing Balsamo's ability to engage in a genuine technical discussion of the Flight Data Recorder (FDR) recovered from Flight 77.
I ended up trying to explain to him one of the most elementary facts about digital recording of time-sampled data.
(This sequence is limited to posts by Balsamo and myself, but my first four posts quote enough of others' posts to establish some context.)
It would be easy to overlook the essential lunacy of that exchange.
If the FDR belonged to the aircraft that hit the Pentagon, then the recording latency might be relevant but Rob Balsamo's interpretation of the FDR data is just wrong.
Otherwise the FDR was planted, and was entirely faked or belonged to an aircraft that did not hit the Pentagon. Either way, its data do not end at impact, making the recording latency irrelevant, so Rob's use of the recording latency to argue that the last altitude was recorded at or near the Pentagon is just inane.
If the FDR data are fake, however, then they were faked pretty well for a while. After a few systematic adjustments to correct reasonably apparent calibration errors, the FDR data do match radar data that give us independent verification for much of the course flown by Flight 77 from takeoff until the aircraft is about 6 seconds away from the Pentagon, where (according to John Farmer) the positional data end.
Why the FDR data should be faked so well for so long, only to overlook something so obvious as the altitude at the end, has never been satisfactorily explained.
Farmer used to consult with me for his work, but once his ego got to be too much after i tried to explain DME to him, he kinda lost it.
Rob Balsamo, 28 June 2008
Imagine that.
After witnessing Rob Balsamo's extravagant contumely, I regard Rob's condemnation of his former collaborator John Farmer, and of Farmer's careful written analysis, as a ringing endorsement.
If John Farmer's analysis is correct, then the last altitude recorded on the FDR data fits just fine with all other evidence.
If John Farmer is right, however, then we have to wonder why the data end about 6 seconds before impact.
As an old programmer who has some nodding acquaintance with electronics, and has encountered a few errors and failures in flash memory devices, I can easily imagine some moderately plausible technical explanations for that.
Instead of indulging in technical speculation, however, I'd like to speculate about possible government deception. (Why should Rob have all the fun?)
So long as we're being asked to consider the possibility that the FDR data were faked or truncated, and the FDR planted in the Pentagon by persons unknown for reasons unknown or cockamamie, shouldn't we also consider the possibility that the FDR really did belong to Flight 77, with its last few seconds of data censored by the DoD so potential terrorists wouldn't know details of a final approach that had succeeded in hitting the Pentagon?
When you get right down to it, the only reason not to consider more plausible alternatives to Rob Balsamo's favored interpretation of the FDR data is that Rob might call you stupid. Since Rob is already calling us stupid, I see no downside.
Last updated 3 July 2008.