Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

Pilots For 9/11 Truth Forum _ Debate _ John Farmer Aka Bcr Aka 911files - Csv File Was Altered

Posted by: johndoeX Feb 27 2007, 12:35 PM

Recent email exchange with a mathmatics and statics expert in reverse engineering data...

QUOTE
Rob,

I posted a little analysis I did based on the FDR data and it suggests that my hypothetical was indeed what was done to the data. I’ve demonstrated it to my satisfaction and I’ll leave the rest in your capable hands. My guess is the simulation was done before the data alteration (that is why in the video it flies north of the Citgo station). To be honest, they really did do a sloppy job in the alteration and I would expect better from our civil servants. The guy who did the work should be fired for not doing a sanity check before releasing it.

http://911files.info/blog/?p=58

I just needed to know if I was dealing with one or two planes before continuing with my own work.

Regards,

John Farmer


QUOTE
From: Pilots For Truth [mailto: pilotsfortruth@yahoo.com ]
Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2007 10:31 AM
To: John Farmer
Subject: Re: My hypothetical seems to be the case

Hi John,

Are you saying that the .csv file was altered in heading to match the south flight path?

If i understand your work correctly and what you explain above. .this is exactly what you are saying. Give me a call when you get a chance if you can.

Rob

QUOTE
John Farmer <xxxxxx@xxxxengineer.com> wrote:
Yep…



Just got off the phone with him and we will be doing an interview shortly. He gave me permission to post this.

Rob

Posted by: Beached Feb 27 2007, 01:42 PM

Excellent job! cheers.gif This is pretty damning to say the least!

Posted by: Sanders Feb 27 2007, 02:32 PM

Go get 'em Rob cheers.gif

Posted by: Cary Feb 27 2007, 04:06 PM

Yeeha. Kick some ass.

Posted by: painter Feb 27 2007, 04:54 PM

W. O. W. !!! thumbsup.gif

Posted by: UnderTow Mar 1 2007, 12:01 PM

Here's the Track Angle True/Mag from ReadOut2

http://www.aa77fdr.com/readout2/NAV_TrackAngles.csv

It's says at the end:
NAVtrackangletrue 61.2
NAVtrackanglemag 71.4

Does it compare, as well as how does the whole set compare with the NTSB?

NTSB Tabular
9:37:44 70 (MAG)

Posted by: UnderTow Mar 1 2007, 12:13 PM

Here is a graphic of the final x seconds (from left to right) comparing ReadOut2 and NTSB mag data.


Posted by: johndoeX Mar 1 2007, 12:32 PM

QUOTE (UnderTow @ Mar 1 2007, 12:01 PM)
It's says at the end:
NAVtrackangletrue 61.2
NAVtrackanglemag 71.4

Does it compare, as well as how does the whole set compare with the NTSB?

NTSB Tabular
9:37:44 70 (MAG)

Interesting.

I always suspected the heading was altered throughout the original csv data to try and match it with the physical damage and end of path. But working back from the impact hole based on true course.. it never really lines up 'perfectly'.

Now that it appears the end heading is 1 more degree off, it further conflicts with the physical damage path.

Thanks UT!

Posted by: johndoeX Mar 1 2007, 12:36 PM

QUOTE (UnderTow @ Mar 1 2007, 12:13 PM)

it appears right around 27 seconds and 50 degrees is where they started to 'twist' the original csv file data a bit to match a more southern path.


But, both files would have had to been manipulated (of which we now know for a fact both were in some form or another), to match the south path (err... i should say trying to match the south path...)

Posted by: UnderTow Mar 1 2007, 01:42 PM

Not sure about all of what you said Rob.

Anyway, Heading is only one piece, while it shows which way your pointing, it doesn't show where you are by itself.

By both files, I assume you mean the Raw Dump and the NTSB CSV.

Manipulating the raw file is quite a leap I think, while not un-possible, if true means the whole FDR should/would/could be thrown out. Thus negating anything it holds and anything concluded from it.

However, it is evident that past 50 degrees, around the last minute of time, some additional corrections were made to the NTSB data beyond the smoothing and syncing of the parameter.

Posted by: johndoeX Mar 1 2007, 01:49 PM

We dont throw anything out that was provided by the govt in an attempt to ignore it (i know thats not what you said.. but just making this clear).

You are correct that heading doesnt determine position. But John was working with lat/long. You providing the heading information shows that it was also manipulated between the two files.

The raw FDR file was manipulated in the fact that Vertical speed is omitted. The raw FDR file should have that information. I think we spoke about this before.. not sure.. wink.gif

cheers.gif

Posted by: UnderTow Mar 1 2007, 02:35 PM

Why would I ever throw any of this out. Ever. That's not what I meant.

Concluding that part of the data is manipulated will throw into question the validity of all the data. I think it simply goes back to the logic between the extreme cases of 100% fake/planted and 100% real/authentic.

And when I say would/should/could I mean 'or' between thoses words. There are nine modal verbs in English: can, could, may, might, must, shall, should, will, and would.

Posted by: johndoeX Mar 1 2007, 02:42 PM

QUOTE (UnderTow @ Mar 1 2007, 02:35 PM)
Why would I ever throw any of this out. Ever.  That's not what I meant.

Concluding that part of the data is manipulated will throw into question the validity of all the data.  I think it simply goes back to the logic between the extreme cases of 100% fake/planted and 100% real/authentic.

Well. .we already know for a fact the animation was manipulated regarding altitude and altimeter setting on the descent to make the animation aircraft appear lower than actual. That conclusion is concrete.

Of course we wont be throwing anything out regarding this information. Its possible the whole thing was fabricated as i have said many times before..

And now we know that the csv file was manipulated to make the aircraft appear as if it was approaching the pentagon from the south path...


But.. if it were all fabricated.. its as alarming as it being accurate and a conclusion of it all being fabricated should definitely not be dismissed.

We have no doubt that there is definitely a cover-up involved regarding this data... now we just need to determine if there was complicity. Questioning the govt and holding their feet to the fire based on this information will help us determine if some within the govt were complicit.

As our mission statement says.. :

"We do not offer theory or point blame...." ... yet wink.gif

cheers.gif salute.gif

Posted by: SwingDangler Mar 2 2007, 02:56 PM

Gentlemen again thankyou for having me.

Have any of you come across information regarding downed atenne on top of the Hotel Sheridan from whatever was flying over the area?

Two, did the pilots who produced the animation of the flight path error in the maganetic compass heading of the animation as suggested by Farmer's study?

Posted by: johndoeX Mar 2 2007, 05:03 PM

QUOTE (SwingDangler @ Mar 2 2007, 02:56 PM)
Gentlemen again thankyou for having me.

Have any of you come across information regarding downed atenne on top of the Hotel Sheridan from whatever was flying over the area?

Havent seen reports of this.

QUOTE
Two, did the pilots who produced the animation of the flight path error in the maganetic compass heading of the animation as suggested by Farmer's study?


Not sure what you're asking here, but the flight path is secondary inquiry to the govt and was added as an issue when confirmed by eyewitnesses as seen in the http://thepentacon.com.

I have spoken with John and he feels it actually may be an inverse correction to make the aircraft appear on the south side in the csv file.

Posted by: johndoeX Apr 1 2007, 03:21 PM

QUOTE (johndoeX @ Mar 1 2007, 01:32 PM)
QUOTE (UnderTow @ Mar 1 2007, 12:01 PM)


It's says at the end:
NAVtrackangletrue  61.2
NAVtrackanglemag  71.4

Does it compare, as well as how does the whole set compare with the NTSB?

NTSB Tabular
9:37:44 70 (MAG)

Interesting.

I always suspected the heading was altered throughout the original csv data to try and match it with the physical damage and end of path. But working back from the impact hole based on true course.. it never really lines up 'perfectly'.

Now that it appears the end heading is 1 more degree off, it further conflicts with the physical damage path.

Thanks UT!



Forgot to post this picture here to show how the physical damage does not line up with the "61.2 degrees" found in the csv file.

It appears we now know why it doenst line up 'perfectly'. They didnt take their time altering the csv file to make it show the southern approach and line up with the physical damage..

Above picture shows right wing would have never hit pole 1 on the CSV path of 61.2 degrees.

Posted by: spcengineer Jun 26 2007, 02:07 PM

The NTSB sent me a CD with the UA93 and AA77 data sets. I did a comparative study between the two related to this topic.

Indeed the heading alteration stands out and since the data I'm working with is direct from the NTSB and not P4T (as the first was), any problems cannot be blamed on P4T.

Summary post - http://911files.info/blog/?p=245
Full Study (pdf) - http://911files.info/ntsb_foia/comparative_study_ua93_aa77.pdf

Posted by: spcengineer Jul 27 2007, 05:28 AM

A comparison of UA93 and AA77 FDR data for roll angle and lateral acceleration versus dHm/dt (change in magnetic heading) also indicates an abnormal population.

http://911files.info/blog/?p=255

Posted by: amazed! Jul 27 2007, 09:18 PM

Engineer

For the sake of this dummy, what do you mean by abnormal population? tongue.gif

Posted by: spcengineer Aug 9 2007, 11:18 AM

A group of data (such as UA93 FDR data) without special circumstances will generally tend to form a normal population (Gaussian distribution). In some populations a special cause affects it and the distribution becomes shifted (as with the AA77 FDR data).

All that really means is that it is under the influence of something which makes it different from what would be commonly expected. For example, the UA93 roll data is fairly well distributed (maximum and minimum values same magnitude and quantity) and centered on zero. That is what I would expect to see. In the case of AA77, the roll angle has a shift in the data with both the median and mean not centered on zero. Or in other words, for some reason in the case of AA77, it shows an extremely disproportionate number of roll angle values in magnitude and quantity towards the positive end of the scale.

I’m sure there could be a lot of reasons for the shift in the data, although it appears in latitude and longitude, roll angle, and several other variables. Since the shift in the longitude is definitely something that can be compared with known values, there is no doubt that it exists and there is no reason to believe that the shifts in the other values exist as well.

Why the data is shifted is beyond my meager mental capacity to even render any guess that I would be able to support, so I won’t. I think Rob has suggested a “calibration error”, but I’m not sure that accounts for the roll angles being shifted. Whether the special cause that is creating the shifts is intentional or some unknown processing error is something only the NTSB can address. Unfortunately, they are not telling.

Posted by: amazed! Jul 21 2012, 07:37 AM

Thanks for that, these years later. smile.gif

Posted by: onesliceshort Jul 21 2012, 07:01 PM



I'm just realizing that gif was put there by Rob.

Ha!

Posted by: rob balsamo Jul 21 2012, 11:22 PM

QUOTE (onesliceshort @ Jul 21 2012, 08:01 PM) *


I'm just realizing that gif was put there by Rob.

Ha!


Actually, it is an image attached to the Troll group. "911files" has proven himself a troll, although he is still free to post here. Granted, he will never confront us again... instead, he just flip-flops often, obsesses nearly daily over people who he thinks are nuts, and lies through his teeth... hence.. .the troll designation.

For example, I have recently become aware that "911files" claims that I am the cause of his "mistake" in determining the "CSV File was altered". Well, anyone who reads this thread thoroughly will recognize that "911files" came to us with his claims... and held firm in his claims. Bottom line.... not only does "911files" make many "mistakes", but he is also proven to be a compulsive and blatant liar.

And despite John Farmer (aka 911files/BCR/spcengineer) claims he was once part of P4T, anyone who knows how to use the http://archive.org/web/web.php will readily understand that John Farmer was NEVER a part of Pilots For 9/11 Truth.

I especially get a kick out of his lies that he claims CIT and P4T somehow "hacked" his websites, and that is the reason for him deleting all his past work.

The guy is completely delusional, and is the reason why he cannot get one aviation professional to endorse anything he writes. Not even biased http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4752715&postcount=52.

Posted by: amazed! Aug 6 2012, 09:33 AM

Just happened to catch a recent video of a speech given by Dennis Cimino in Canada. He tends to digress a fair amount, but it was still very interesting to hear. I now understand the FDR topic a little better, and CSV and such.

His explanation of data fields and files on the FDR, the bootstrapping sequence and such, was most informative to me.

Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)