IPBFacebook



POSTS MADE TO THIS FORUM ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF PILOTS FOR 911 TRUTH
FOR OFFICIAL PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH STATEMENTS AND ANALYSIS, PLEASE VISIT PILOTSFOR911TRUTH.ORG


DIGITAL DOWNLOADS

WELCOME - PLEASE REGISTER OR LOG IN FOR FULL FORUM ACCESS ( Log In | Register )

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
New Legge Paper Continues Dishonest Attack On Pilots For 9/11 Truth, Cites Mackey, Implies P4T not interested in science & much more

tnemelckram
post Sep 27 2009, 02:07 PM
Post #21





Group: Contributor
Posts: 767
Joined: 30-January 08
Member No.: 2,690



Hi All!

We all have to defer to experts in matters outside our expertise. I defer to PFT when it comes to technical aerodynamic and flight procedure issues such as whether the right data was used, and the right equations used. Hell, assuming Legge was qualified (which is in question) and confined himself to technical matters, I'd even give him some of the same deference.

But you don't have to be an expert to question the underlying purpose, method, assumptions and evidence were sound. Legge is fair game1. His attack seems to be is confined to questioning the assumptions and methods in the PFT analysis instead of offering his own alternative technical analysis. In doing so, his purpose and assumptions are not sound.

Legge says that after drawing certain limited conclusions from the FDR data analysis, they do not make the ultimate conclusion to be drawn from it, which is the plane did not hit the Pentagon. He says this is contradictory. He fails to recognize that PFT's central theme about the FDR seems to be the failure of this customary and accepted method of proof of the final course, altitude, speed, bank and other factors supporting a conclusion about whether or not the plane struck the Pentagon.

When you serve people a cut of roast, the first thing they ask is "where's the salt"? When a plane crashes, the first thing they ask is "where's the FDR"? That's because the purpose of the FDR is to provide such data and so is the customary and accepted method of proof of what happened. It seems to me that the crux of what PFT says2 is that the FDR data is so contradictory and/or adulterated that it fails to provide the proof that one would expect. Then as a secondary point, if you set that aside and assume that meaningful conclusions can be drawn from its data, some of it belies the South Path and impact.

Legge fails to grasp the import of this failure of the expected proof. That is why PFT says there is no proof of an impact. But PFT also recognizes that due to this, it also fails to provide the expected proof of no impact, so they don't draw that conclusion either. He's conflating the secondary point that assumes regularity with the primary point that there is no regularity. Moreover, the failure of expected proof means that it also cannot be used to support alternative conclusions, such as the Farmer conclusion he relies on that the data stops some seconds before impact. No scientist would rely on data when the controlled procedure for producing it has demonstrably failed.

This is in addition to the other logical problems with Legge's effort.

1. His statement of purpose is both meaningless and stated in a way that will prove nothing new.

2. He relies on the ASCE Report for saying the plane hit the poles when in fact it just says others "reportedy" say the plane hit them and stops short of reaching that conclusion.

3. He relies on the ASCE Report as scientifically precise in terms of method and data when its wording signals that it is not. For example, the statement that the angle of impact was "approximately" 42 degrees which seems to open up an unlimited margin of error. Or its "column failure pattern" analysis, which on its face just proves that some instrument of destruction produced the pattern but not that it also must be a plane crash.

4. He assumes that Hani had normal piloting skills, knowledge and experience when the facts show that this assumption is unwarranted only support the opposite assumption.

___________________________
1. Please excuse me for continuing to address myself to Legge after harping on how we should address ourselves to the government. My weak excuse is a license from the State of Pennsylvania that allows talking out of both sides of the mouth!

2. If I am misstating this, please correct me.! An accurate rewording of what PFT says to fit this purpose is intended.

This post has been edited by tnemelckram: Sep 27 2009, 02:13 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_Turbofan_*
post Sep 27 2009, 04:56 PM
Post #22





Guest






[left]
QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Sep 27 2009, 07:11 AM) *
Wait, do the forces vary along a parabola as Legge claims? Or are the forces constant as Mackey claims....? Someone is wrong, either Legge saying Mackey is not wrong or Mackey's calculations. Hint: They are both wrong.


I'm not a pilot; I'm not a Ph.D., but I am a layman with respect to this topic.

Having said that, if I stated that the aircraft would pick up speed due to gravity and forces would increase as the aircraft descended along the 'parabolic' curve,
would I be correct?

I mean...unless Hani was able to throttle the plane such that he reduced speed to compensate for gravity at exactly 4G throughout the curve? rolleyes.gif

Am I close, or do I need to be a NASA Scientits to figure this out?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ligon
post Sep 27 2009, 10:16 PM
Post #23





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 83
Joined: 2-March 09
Member No.: 4,182



Legge writes on Blogger: "I have submitted a new thread for version 5. I point out that there will be a version 6 as I have already found errors. "
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Sep 27 2009, 10:26 PM
Post #24



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,745
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (Ligon @ Sep 27 2009, 10:16 PM) *
Legge writes on Blogger: "I have submitted a new thread for version 5. I point out that there will be a version 6 as I have already found errors. "



laughing1.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
tnemelckram
post Sep 27 2009, 10:55 PM
Post #25





Group: Contributor
Posts: 767
Joined: 30-January 08
Member No.: 2,690



Hi Rob!

QUOTE
laughing1.gif


Do you think it's really him finding the errors, all by himself?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Sep 27 2009, 10:59 PM
Post #26



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,745
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (tnemelckram @ Sep 27 2009, 10:55 PM) *
Hi Rob!



Do you think it's really him finding the errors, all by himself?



Of course not... this paper was "peer-reviewed". Remember? rolleyes.gif

Errr.. .wait, doesnt the "peer-review" process happen prior to the first publish?


What a joke....
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
albertchampion
post Sep 27 2009, 11:50 PM
Post #27





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 1,843
Joined: 1-March 07
Member No.: 710



there are none so blind that have eyesight but refuse to see.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
painter
post Sep 28 2009, 01:01 AM
Post #28


∞* M E R C U R I A L *∞


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 5,870
Joined: 25-August 06
From: SFO
Member No.: 16



QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Sep 27 2009, 07:59 PM) *
What a joke....

It is. Legge is. And JO911S is BECOMING a joke due to giving this ass-hat any web cred what so ever. And that, beyond a joke, is a crying shame.

THE MAN DOES NOT KNOW WHAT HE IS TALKING ABOUT. His math is flawed. His logic is flawed. His whole premise is not only flawed it is biased -- and that is the whole purpose of his paper -- TO LEGITIMATE A BIAS WITH PSEUDOSCIENTIFIC HAND WAVING. A bias, we have to add, that validates the official narrative. The FDR doesn't validate it. PERIOD. And if the FDR doesn't validate it then we are left with only one conclusion: THE FDR DATA HAS BEEN TAMPERED WITH AND IS THEREFORE FRAUDULENT. And why would anyone NEED to falsify the data in any way?

Come on, people, this isn't rocket science. This isn't something vastly complicated. We are told that American Airlines Flight 77 was crashed into the Pentagon on the morning of 9/11/01.

FIRST QUESTION: What are the odds this WOULD NOT be SO BLOODY FUCKING OBVIOUS there would be NO QUESTION about it what so fucking ever???

Need I really remind everyone in the 9/11 Truth Movement that STATISTICS IS A SCIENCE?

SECOND QUESTION: What are the odds that this BLOODY FUCKING MIRACLE would be pulled off by a man who could barely speak English, had barely flown at all before and even then in a small aircraft and poorly, after (allegedly) making a deep spiraling descent maneuver that even professional pilots say would be difficult for them to execute?

THIRD QUESTION: What are the odds that this BLOODY FUCKING IDIOT could JUST MISS the VDOT antenna, pull out of the dive, clip light pole #1 which equally miraculously spears a wayward taxi without seriously injuring the driver or the hood of his car, clips the remaining four light polls, and yet does not loose any control of the craft such that HE MANAGES TO BURRY THE WHOLE 100+ TON AIRCRAFT INSIDE THE PENTAGON AT EXACTLY GROUND LEVEL WITHOUT DAMAGING EITHER THE LAWN OR THE FOUNDATION OF THE BUILDING.

FOURTH QUESTION: What are the odds that ALL THE ABOVE would occur on THE ONE SIDE OF THE PENTAGON which had JUST been strengthened to withstand PRECISELY such an attack?

FIFTH QUESTION: What are the bloody fucking odds that ANY AIRCRAFT WHAT SO EVER would be allowed to traverse hundreds of miles of open sky on a clear blue day DIRECTLY TOWARD WASHINGTON DC for at least a god-damned half hour AFTER EVERYONE IN THE CIVILIZED WORLD KNEW THAT AMERICA WAS UNDER ATTACK BY TERRORISTS USING AIRLINERS AS WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION?

NEED I GO ON? Do I really have to bring in the FDR, the lack of SOP in matching plane debris with maintenance records AT THE PENTAGON and a lousy security video that makes NO SENSE? Do I REALLY have to bring in verified eyewitnesses WHO BET THEIR LIFE that the plane they saw flew NORTH of the Citgo fucking gas station?

WHAT ARE THE ODDS OF ALL THIS, FOLKS?

AT WHAT POINT DOES "COINCIDENCE" FAIL AS AN EXPLANATION FOR THE STATISTICALLY IMPOSSIBLE?

Fuck Legge. Fuck ALL the ass hat "truthers" who continue to claim WITHOUT ANY RATIONALITY WHAT SO EVER that the Pentagon is a "honey pot".

Yeah, it is a bloody fucking honey pot, alright. You look down that rajit hole and you find a mirrored funhouse full of wild hearings chasing red geese: a bloody riddle, wrapped in a fucking mystery, inside an god-damned enigma. OH YEAH, it is a honey pot alright -- and some of the self-appointed leaders of the so called 9/11 "Truth" Movement have their heads so far down it they can't see their ass for their elbows.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
StefanS
post Sep 28 2009, 02:07 PM
Post #29





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 27
Joined: 13-August 09
Member No.: 4,544



Fiery rant there Painter! laughing1.gif

But I completely get your frustration.

The notion of rejecting ever more mountainous evidence refuting the OTC at the Pentagon on the basis of an imaginary "what if..." scenario which orginated entirely from somone's imagination (and I wonder who's...) is farcical. As is the people who act in such a way claim to be doing so for the sake of "science" or an "evidence led approach".

Deferring all common sense to a completely made-up story, essentially a fantasy (that the perpertrators of 9/11 are deliberately making the Pentagon seem suspicious so they can build up a movement behind it, then release footage of the plane hitting) displays something very different to "science" or an "evidence led approach".

It has the hall marks of magical thinking and the tendency to believe in unsubstantiated myths simply through them being suggested with a raised eye brow and a nudge.

The funniest thing I heard recently was from truebeleauger on truth action forum, who suggested that even if it was true that the plane didn't hit the Pentagon, the government could still use video fakery to forge a video of it doing so, making us all look silly...

blink.gif

What the hell?

I smell desperation...

This post has been edited by StefanS: Sep 28 2009, 02:10 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dMz
post Sep 28 2009, 09:12 PM
Post #30



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 5,019
Joined: 2-October 07
From: USA, a Federal corporation
Member No.: 2,294



QUOTE (StefanS @ Sep 28 2009, 12:07 PM) *
The funniest thing I heard recently was from truebeleauger on truth action forum, who suggested that even if it was true that the plane didn't hit the Pentagon, the government could still use video fakery to forge a video of it doing so, making us all look silly...

blink.gif

What the hell?

I smell desperation...

A bit on "beleaguer...":

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/beleaguer

One
entry found.

Main Entry: be·lea·guer
Pronunciation: \bi-ˈlē-gər, bē-\
Function: transitive verb
Inflected Form(s): be·lea·guered; be·lea·guer·ing \-g(ə-)riŋ\
Etymology: Dutch belegeren, from be- (akin to Old English be-) + leger camp; akin to Old High German legar bed — more at lair
Date: 1587

1 : besiege
2 : trouble, harass <beleaguered parents> <an economically beleaguered city>

— be·lea·guer·ment \-mənt\ noun
-----------------------------------------------------------
Hmmmm....

On my own personal long-since-old "handle:" (which is quite private, but I will address the matter here tonight- possibly one time only- wink.gif ) : about the "dMole" thing- whazzup with that?

A: An old friend "stuck me" with the nickname, and I STUCK WITH it! You can choose to either recoil, run, hide, walk away, or WHAT-THE-FUCKEVER YOU NEED to do there, dude...

"It" might have several meanings, just as a guess...

Here is one:

"Main Entry: 6mo·le
Pronunciation: \ˈmō-lā\
Function: noun
Etymology: Mexican Spanish, from Nahuatl mōlli sauce
Date: 1901

: a spicy sauce made with chilies and usually chocolate and served with meat"


http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mole
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dMz
post Sep 28 2009, 10:00 PM
Post #31



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 5,019
Joined: 2-October 07
From: USA, a Federal corporation
Member No.: 2,294



No More Mr. Nice Guy


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZnhuOEUFXA&feature=fvw

[FYI: "Alice" is a Republican and a die-hard golfer down in Maricopa County, IIRC... dunno.gif ohmy.gif ]
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dMz
post Sep 30 2009, 04:12 PM
Post #32



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 5,019
Joined: 2-October 07
From: USA, a Federal corporation
Member No.: 2,294



It looks like Michael Wolsey has recently posted another interview, this one with Dr. Legge.

http://media.libsyn.com/media/visibility91...11_dr_legge.mp3
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Michael Morrisse...
post Oct 7 2009, 10:02 AM
Post #33





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 23
Joined: 7-March 07
Member No.: 730



My take on Frank Legge's recent article "What Hit the Pentagon" here. If you comment on OpEdNews, I think (but can't swear) more people will read it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sanders
post Oct 7 2009, 10:46 AM
Post #34



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 7,990
Joined: 13-September 06
Member No.: 49



QUOTE (Michael Morrissey @ Oct 11 2009, 09:02 AM) *
My take on Frank Legge's recent article "What Hit the Pentagon" here. If you comment on OpEdNews, I think (but can't swear) more people will read it.


Good read wink.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Michael Morrisse...
post Oct 7 2009, 11:31 AM
Post #35





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 23
Joined: 7-March 07
Member No.: 730



QUOTE (Sanders @ Oct 7 2009, 03:46 AM) *
Good read wink.gif

Thanks. I couldn't do much with the technical stuff (I leave that to people here), but the rest was bad enough.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dMz
post Oct 7 2009, 11:46 AM
Post #36



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 5,019
Joined: 2-October 07
From: USA, a Federal corporation
Member No.: 2,294



QUOTE (Michael Morrissey @ Oct 7 2009, 09:31 AM) *
Thanks. I couldn't do much with the technical stuff (I leave that to people here), but the rest was bad enough.

So was my research and the "ancient" metal "helpful" then, Michael?

FWIW, Es posible que yo tengo las algunas cosas que son "useful"? informacion que esta en mi cabeza

------------------------
A Dios...

Mis Amigos...

d wink.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Michael Morrisse...
post Oct 7 2009, 01:37 PM
Post #37





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 23
Joined: 7-March 07
Member No.: 730



QUOTE (dMole @ Oct 7 2009, 04:46 AM) *
So was my research and the "ancient" metal "helpful" then, Michael?

FWIW, Es posible que you tengo las algunas cosas que son "useful"? informacion que esta en mi cabeza

------------------------
A Dios...

Mis Amigos...

d wink.gif


No comprendo.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
lunk
post Oct 7 2009, 05:01 PM
Post #38



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 4,983
Joined: 1-April 07
Member No.: 875



QUOTE (Michael Morrissey @ Oct 7 2009, 07:02 AM) *
My take on Frank Legge's recent article "What Hit the Pentagon" here. If you comment on OpEdNews, I think (but can't swear) more people will read it.


Great analysis!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dMz
post Oct 7 2009, 06:27 PM
Post #39



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 5,019
Joined: 2-October 07
From: USA, a Federal corporation
Member No.: 2,294



QUOTE (Michael Morrissey @ Oct 7 2009, 11:37 AM) *
No comprendo.

Sorry for that typo- it should have been "yo tengo" above, not "you," and I think I messed up the algun part too- it's been many years...

http://www.wordreference.com/

The "ancient metal" reference was to ol' "Alice da' Coop" [Vincent Furnier] and the video above.

http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alice_Cooper

http://www.vh1.com/artists/az/cooper_alice/bio.jhtml

[FWIW, I was once a "neighbor" to the man.]

EDIT: on "algun:" wacko.gif
http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=28445

EDIT2: I apparently needed a "todavia" or something close above earlier, too:
http://www.wordreference.com/es/translatio...?tranword=still
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
GroundPounder
post Oct 7 2009, 07:38 PM
Post #40





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 1,748
Joined: 13-December 06
From: maryland
Member No.: 315



mole...you out there man
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
4 User(s) are reading this topic (4 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 




RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 13th October 2019 - 07:16 PM