IPB




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

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

10 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 > »   
Closed TopicStart new topic
Duhbunkers try to explain ACARS and fail

rob balsamo
post Dec 4 2011, 01:27 AM
Post #21



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,709
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (onesliceshort @ Dec 3 2011, 10:13 PM) *
Just to add my 2cents on the alleged "printer timestamp" rolleyes.gif ...wtf would be the point of a printer timestamp when those on the ground would want to know at exactly what time the response was received?



Good point... and after thinking about this a bit more, I think gman himself doesn't really know (or is confused) regarding his own timestamps.

I went over to take another look, gman has posted his telex of the ACARS from his airline...

This is what he posted...


He claims the top ACARS is "... the identical format to the quoted acars messages [from United Airlines]."

Well, no, it's not.... for numerous reasons. The first thing which stands out is that he has two time stamps side by side on the bottom time stamp, including alpha text, while United ACARS do not.

I think he was told that the first time stamp is the sent time stamp, and the second time stamp is when the "printer" received the message. Gman translated this to meaning his printer in his office, when in reality, it probably means the printer on the flight deck in the aircraft, again, for his specific airline.

Either way, they aren't the same as United ACARS. Therefore, it is better to source a United Airlines Dispatcher regarding ACARS message timestamps from United Airlines, than some anonymous "gman" on some forum who readily admits himself "I have never claimed to be an expert in anything" combined with the fact he doesn't know anything about Cat A and B flight tracking, nor does he think it's important. Although I'm sure the "duhbunkers" prefer the latter... as Mr Ballinger seems to put a pretty big wrench in their whole theory...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
scott75
post Dec 4 2011, 03:27 AM
Post #22





Group: Troll
Posts: 271
Joined: 6-November 08
Member No.: 3,971



QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Dec 3 2011, 08:07 PM) *
One time stamp is sent, one is received, according to Mr Ballinger. He references the aircraft, not the DSP, not a printer in the room he is sitting in... he is referencing the aircraft.

Those who make excuse for the govt story will speculate till smoke starts to pour out their ears, trying to twist the words any possible way they can, but the fact remains, the statement made by Ballinger is straight forward, simple... and doesn't leave any room for ambiguity.


Mr. Ballinger stated that the ACARS messages have two times listed: the time sent and the time received. He stated that once he sends the message it is delivered to the addressed aircraft through AIRINC immediately. He is not aware of any delay in the aircraft receiving the message after he sends it.


Good point. On to another; Another poster (booN) is now asking why we put so much trust in Ballinger, when many have said that he isn't an ACARS expert. However, I know that one of your core members is an ACARS expert; he's even quoted in your article. Does he agree that the second time stamp was indeed denoting that the message had been received by the aircraft?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Dec 4 2011, 03:47 AM
Post #23



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,709
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (scott75 @ Dec 4 2011, 02:27 AM) *
Good point. On to another; Another poster (booN) is now asking why we put so much trust in Ballinger, when many have said that he isn't an ACARS expert.


He isn't an ACARS expert. He is a Dispatcher. and it's not that we are putting "trust" in him, we are reporting what he said. Others are trying to make excuses for it without any source for their speculation whatsoever. I don't expect Ballinger to know how the messages are routed but he surely is expected to know how to read his own ACARS and what the time stamps mean, yes?

Just like gman isnt familiar with Cat A and B Flight Tracking, I dont expect Ballinger to be... but clearly Ballinger knows more about the time stamps and ACARS format at United Airlines than gman does....

booNy still hasnt got the nads to come here and ask his own question huh? Not surprised....

Has he called ARINC yet? lol... not sure why I'm even asking as clearly the guy is afraid of the truth. Let me guess, he thinks the document provided by some anonymous guy on some forum debunks the statement made by Ballinger?

Does booNy also think gmans ACARS format is in the same format as the United Airlines ACARS?

QUOTE
I know that one of your core members is an ACARS expert; he's even quoted in your article. Does he agree that the second time stamp was indeed denoting that the message had been received by the aircraft?


Conversely, Dennis is an ACARS expert, not a Dispatcher, I wouldn't expect him to know exactly what the time stamps mean at United Airlines when the messages can be tailored to the needs of United. But Dennis certainly knows how they are routed, and as he has stated from the beginning corroborated by source documents, the messages would not be routed through MDT and PIT if the aircraft were in NY, regardless if they are received or not.

Hope this helps.... tell booNy he is better off sticking to his video games.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
scott75
post Dec 4 2011, 04:25 AM
Post #24





Group: Troll
Posts: 271
Joined: 6-November 08
Member No.: 3,971



QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Dec 4 2011, 02:47 AM) *
He isn't an ACARS expert. He is a Dispatcher. and it's not that we are putting "trust" in him, we are reporting what he said. Others are trying to make excuses for it without any source for their speculation whatsoever. I don't expect Ballinger to know how the messages are routed but he surely is expected to know how to read his own ACARS and what the time stamps mean, yes?


Wow, good point.

QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Dec 4 2011, 02:47 AM) *
Just like gman isnt familiar with Cat A and B Flight Tracking, I dont expect Ballinger to be... but clearly Ballinger knows more about the time stamps and ACARS format at United Airlines than gman does....


True.

QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Dec 4 2011, 02:47 AM) *
booNy still hasnt got the nads to come here and ask his own question huh? Not surprised....


I've been thinking about this.. I've been thinking that perhaps I'm a better interface. After all, I -agree- with your stance, whereas he clearly leans the other way. So maybe it makes more sense if I were to ask.

QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Dec 4 2011, 02:47 AM) *
Has he called ARINC yet? lol... not sure why I'm even asking as clearly the guy is afraid of the truth. Let me guess, he thinks the document provided by some anonymous guy on some forum debunks the statement made by Ballinger?


I don't think so. But he did send them an email, and said he'd get back to us if they wrote him back. I actually did call ARINC again. I told them I had a question regarding ACARS messages and they said I should email them about it, so I did. This is what I asked:
"I just wanted to know, in ACARS messages, is it true that the second time stamp in messages that are successfully uplinked to aircraft signifies the time that the message was received by the aircraft?"

I regret that I didn't ask specifically for United Airlines ACARS messages. I got an initial response saying that they were routing my question to the proper department:
****
Thank you for emailing XXXX

Due to the nature of your question, I have taken the liberty of forwarding your email to the appropriate Airport Authority department for assistance and they will respond directly.

It is the goal of XXXX to provide the traveling public with the highest level of customer service. As always, your comments, questions and experiences provide us with an invaluable source of feedback.
****

QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Dec 4 2011, 02:47 AM) *
Does booNy also think gmans ACARS format is in the same format as the United Airlines ACARS?


I think I may ask him that soon (Can't right now, I think the forum is down for maintenance).

QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Dec 4 2011, 02:47 AM) *
Conversely, Dennis is an ACARS expert, not a Dispatcher, I wouldn't expect him to know exactly what the time stamps mean at United Airlines when the messages can be tailored to the needs of United.


Ah, I see.

QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Dec 4 2011, 02:47 AM) *
But Dennis certainly knows how they are routed, and as he has stated from the beginning corroborated by source documents, the messages would not be routed through MDT and PIT if the aircraft were in NY, regardless if they are received or not.


Good point.

QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Dec 4 2011, 02:47 AM) *
Hope this helps.... tell booNy he is better off sticking to his video games.


Lol :-). However, I would like to say that if people like booN and Czero didn't continue to respond to posts from various people who support your reasoning, the conversation might have died a long time ago. I certainly believe that I've learned a fair in large part because of their disagreements with us.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mvb
post Dec 4 2011, 04:30 AM
Post #25





Group: Newbie
Posts: 9
Joined: 26-April 08
Member No.: 3,230



Hey Rob! Would it be possible to overlay positions of MDT and PIT
on to this Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7iwpBEB2pLs...feature=mh_lolz

cheers
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Dec 4 2011, 04:34 AM
Post #26



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,709
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (mvb @ Dec 4 2011, 03:30 AM) *
Hey Rob! Would it be possible to overlay positions of MDT and PIT
on to this Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7iwpBEB2pLs...feature=mh_lolz

cheers


Already done.. they are in the article...






http://pilotsfor911truth.org/ACARS-CONFIRM...FTER-CRASH.html
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Dec 4 2011, 04:58 AM
Post #27



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,709
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (scott75 @ Dec 4 2011, 03:25 AM) *
I've been thinking about this.. I've been thinking that perhaps I'm a better interface. After all, I -agree- with your stance, whereas he clearly leans the other way. So maybe it makes more sense if I were to ask.


booNy should take the advice of his own signature....lol

"Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so." - Douglas Adams

booNy = irony
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sergio
post Dec 4 2011, 07:32 AM
Post #28





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 46
Joined: 15-February 11
Member No.: 5,658



QUOTE (onesliceshort @ Dec 4 2011, 01:51 AM) *
Not sure if this service applies to UA as well. A company that "rings a bell in the cockpit to alert the crew to pick up their radio".

I'm wondering if they also had the same acknowledgement system and if they were used.


This is what Michael J Winter said to the FBI about some messages received by United 93:

Message #2, to the aircraft, was also routed through the RGS near Pittsburgh, PA and was directed to the ACARS printer on the aircraft.
DDLXCXA JFKEO CHI68R
.JFKFOUA 111322/TAR
AGM
AN N591UA/GL PIT
- UA93 EWRSFO
LEROY, MELODY WANTS TO MAKE SURE YOU ARE O.K.!
SEND ME BACK A MESSAGE.
JFKFO TARA CAMPBELL

;09111322 108575 0571


Message #3 was a message to the aircraft from Chicago Dispatch CHIDD listed as a Command Response MD type message. The CMD message, designated in the line "Smi=CMD Agy/Num=65535", was sent to the ACARS screen and utilized the RGS near Pittsburgh, PA. In this type of message, the flight dispatcher can also activate an audible signal to alert the flight crew of the sent message but this was not done.
DDLXCXA CHIAK CHI68R
.CHIAKUA 111323/ED
CMD
AN N591UA/GL PIT
- QUCHIAKUA 1UA93 EWRSFO
- MESSAGE FROM CHIDD
/BEWARE ANY COCKIPT INTROUSION..TWO AIRCRAFT IN NY, HIT TRADE C
ENTER BUILDS...
CHIDD ED BALLINGER
;09111324 108575 0581


Message #7 was sent to the aircraft from CHIDD using a RGS near Akron/Canton, OH. The message was sent to the ACARS screen and was a CMD type message.
DDLXCXA CHIVN CHI68R
.CHIVNUA 111332/ROB
CMD
AN N591UA/GL CAK
- QUCHIVNUA 1 UA93 EWRSFO
- MESSAGE FROM CHIDD
CALLL 133.37

CHIDD ROBERT BRITTAIN

;09111332 108575 0599


Message #8 was sent to the aircraft from CHIDD using the RGS near Akron/Canton, OH. The message ws a CMD message and also activated the audible signal. The audible signal designated as "BEL" in the line "QUCHIAKUA-1-BL>UA 93".
DDLXCXA CHIAK CHI68R
.CHIAKUA 111332/ED
CMD
AN N591UA/GL CAK
- QUCHIAKUA 1UA93 EWRSFO
- MESSAGE FROM CHIDD -
HIGH SECURITY ALERT. SECURE COCKPIT
CHIDD ED BALL1NGER
;09111333 100575 0610


Messages #11 and #12 were sent to the aircraft from CHIDD using the RGS near Cleveland, OH. These messages also activated the audible signal in the aircraft.
DDLXCXA CHIAK CHI68R
.CHIAKUA 111340/ED
CMD
AN N591UA/GL CLE
- QUCHIAKUA 1UA93 EWRSFO
- MESSAGE FROM CHIDD
/HIGH SECURITY ALERT. SECURE COCKPIT.ADMIT NO ONE IN TO COCKPIT.
TWO AIRLINER HIT NY , TRADE CENTER. AND 1 AIRCRAFT IN IAD MISSIN
G AND ONE IN EWR MISSING...TOO UAL 175/93- MISSING

CHIDD ED BALLINGER

;09111341 108575 0638

DDLXCXA CHIAK CHI68R
.CHIAKUA 111341/ED
CMD
AN N591UA/GL CLE
- QUCHIAKUA 1UA93 EWRSFO
- MESSAGE FROM CHIDD
/HIGH SECURITY ALERT. SECURE COCKPIT.ADMIT NO ONE IN TO COCKPIT.
TWO AIRLINER HIT NY , TRADE CENTER. AND 1 AIRCRAFT IN IAD MISSIN
G AND ONE IN EWR MISSING...TOO UAL 175
93 FOUND
CHIDD ED BALLINGER

;09111341 108575 0639


So the answer tour question is: yes. This also applies to United Airlines.
Just let me remind you one more time, however, that the PDF with the list of UAL ACARS released through FOIA does not contain the complete logs of the available ACARS. Unfortunately this is just the version coming from Ballinger's desk. This is why you can't see some important snippets of code such as "QUCHIAKUA-1-BL>UA 93" referred by Winter.

This post has been edited by Sergio: Dec 4 2011, 07:36 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
onesliceshort
post Dec 4 2011, 08:48 AM
Post #29



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 2,612
Joined: 30-January 09
Member No.: 4,095



Wow, thanks very much Sergio!

@Rob

What also makes that message allegedly sent by "gman" non-conclusive is that he had asked ground control "can you save me a copy of this message"..so maybe it's a separate printer copy of the original? dunno.gif

Either way, it's irrelevant given the last few points raised. The ACARS messages that we know of show no "delay" as he claims and I see this as a distraction by GLs to shimmy around the fact that UA175 is officially on record as being within an area 317 miles from New York (within a 70 mile radius) at the time of the impact. And that Ballinger is quoted as per the FBI notes in the PDF as sending a warning to the pilots to beware of cockpit intrusion at 09:23am. The same as the message in question.

Edit:typo

This post has been edited by onesliceshort: Dec 4 2011, 08:49 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
scott75
post Dec 4 2011, 09:18 AM
Post #30





Group: Troll
Posts: 271
Joined: 6-November 08
Member No.: 3,971



QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Dec 4 2011, 03:58 AM) *
booNy should take the advice of his own signature....lol

"Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so." - Douglas Adams

booNy = irony


I'm sure you're right to some extent. On the other hand, of all the people at Unexplained Mysteries (they just got to 100,000 users), he and Czero seem to have learned the most concerning ACARS on the side of the people who still lean towards the official story. So for this reason and for the fact that he's helped keep the debate alive, I think that in a very real way, he's contributed to uncovering the truth on this matter.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
woody
post Dec 4 2011, 12:38 PM
Post #31


Woody Box


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 266
Joined: 28-August 06
Member No.: 20




Here's some background info on Ballinger. The source is the WSJ article I linked above. No shocking news, but interesting anyway, considering his outstanding status as a witness. In later interviews, Ballinger came out with his name.


At about 8:30, air-traffic controllers and United lost contact with United Flight 93, a 757 bound from Newark to San Francisco. The dispatcher who had handled Flight 175 had been sending messages to all 13 of his assigned flights that were airborne, instructing them to land at the nearest United station. One didn't answer: Flight 93.

The dispatcher, a 42-year veteran of United still so shaken by the tragedy he asked that his name not be used, kept firing off messages, but to no effect.

The United dispatcher who handled both Flight 175 and Flight 93 stayed at his post on Sept. 11 and helped the remaining planes under his watch land.

And then?

"I went home and got drunk," he says.

It's been touch and go since.

He took three days off and availed himself of a company counselor. When the counselor said, " 'It's OK to cry,' I broke down." The dispatcher says he won't watch TV anymore. And his wife had a nightmare in which she was seated on an airplane, her wrists bound as hijackers walked down the aisle slashing throats.

Word quickly spread through the company that he was the man who handled the doomed United flights.

"Something inside me died," the man, weeping again, said.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Dec 4 2011, 09:38 PM
Post #32



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,709
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Dec 4 2011, 12:27 AM) *
Good point... and after thinking about this a bit more, I think gman himself doesn't really know (or is confused) regarding his own timestamps.


Now that I am through watching my Giants lose (although it was an excellent game), I took some time to see what our friend "gman" has offered as a follow-up to his ACARS format interpretation. As I suspected above, he doesn't have a clue...

"After reading PB [ProudBird/weedwhacker] post I see that I am also saying something different from him, he says that the time on the bottom is when ARINC receives the message and I am saying that it's when it prints out. Quite honestly I'm not sure which one is correct, both sound feasable[sic] and I don't know how to find out which one is right." - gman1972 at ATS


As usual, it's the blind leading the blind at ATS.

Here's a clue to find out 'which one is right', read a statement from United Airlines Dispatcher Ed Ballinger who has been working UAL Dispatch for decades....

"Mr. Ballinger stated that the ACARS messages have two times listed: the time sent and the time received. He stated that once he sends the message it is delivered to the addressed aircraft through AIRINC immediately. He is not aware of any delay in the aircraft receiving the message after he sends it. "


Here's my next prediction. "gman1972" is not a licensed Dispatcher. He is a data entry clerk told by Dispatcher to send an ACARS. Someone here who has access to ATS might want to ask "gman" if he is a licensed Dispatcher. And if so, is he willing to place his name to his claims as did Mr Ballinger.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Dec 4 2011, 10:11 PM
Post #33



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,709
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



But wait, there's more....

gman just posted this...



Not only does "gman" not understand that individual airlines can tailor their format to their needs, but apparently he does not know that there are differences between SITA and ARINC.

For the layman, gman's statements regarding ACARS format is like saying dealing with Verizon is identical to dealing with Sprint or AT&T.

But it's good to see Proudbird/weedwhacker has conceded/retracted his speculation that he was once so sure about (read: attempting to confuse ATS members)... now all he needs to do is learn the real ACARS network in the USA. (.. and learn how to spell "Jeppesen"...lol)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mvb
post Dec 5 2011, 12:11 AM
Post #34





Group: Newbie
Posts: 9
Joined: 26-April 08
Member No.: 3,230



A few questions came up!

1. Is the ACARS a Telex System and does it print out its message right away without manual input BOTH at ground and Air!!?

2. In the "gman" print link at the Bottom there are two lines
saying both the same: "12031625/12031625" could this be equivalent to "recieved/printed"?

3. Is there a printer within the Airplane or do they recieve the message just digitaly?

4. If there is no printer and the second timestamp just means "printed at ground" how could
the ground personal ever know that the plane has recieved the message?

5. In the Article you describe that there are the tracking options A&B
I recieved this link ( click ) and at the bottom its stated:

QUOTE
The most interesting feature of ACARS to me are the route-plotting options. When an aircraft sends a position report (which contains their current position, altitude, the series of waypoints their route will take them through, and the time they will reach various points along that route), the software plots the co-ordinates onto a map. It's quite easy to have several hundred aircraft within VHF range plotted on the map at any given time.


I am from German so I want to 100% sure if i get it right. It only means that the curent position of the aircraft can be plotted on a map!?

This is not proof that the route of a plane is fed to the ACARS system BEFORE take off to choose the best "Antenas" along the way?!

cheers

This post has been edited by mvb: Dec 5 2011, 12:12 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Dec 5 2011, 12:34 AM
Post #35



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,709
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (mvb @ Dec 4 2011, 11:11 PM) *
A few questions came up!

1. Is the ACARS a Telex System and does it print out its message right away without manual input BOTH at ground and Air!!?


Google "ACARS Telex".

QUOTE
2. In the "gman" print link at the Bottom there are two lines
saying both the same: "12031625/12031625" could this be equivalent to "recieved/printed"?


Can you show me where the side/by-side time stamps are located on the UAL ACARS? Have you read my posts above?

QUOTE
3. Is there a printer within the Airplane or do they recieve the message just digitaly?


Good question as I do not think even "gman" knows the answer and only thinks a printer can be located in an office....

But... here is reality... Click


QUOTE
4. If there is no printer and the second timestamp just means "printed at ground" how could
the ground personal ever know that the plane has recieved the message?


See link above.

QUOTE
5. In the Article you describe that there are the tracking options A&B
I recieved this link ( click ) and at the bottom its stated:



Now read our article.. specifically footnote 5 as it pertains to ARINC Flight Tracking Protocol.


How did the RADES data overlays work out for you? Were you able to find them in the article?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Dec 5 2011, 03:06 AM
Post #36



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,709
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (scott75 @ Dec 4 2011, 08:18 AM) *
I'm sure you're right to some extent. On the other hand, of all the people at Unexplained Mysteries (they just got to 100,000 users), he and Czero seem to have learned the most concerning ACARS on the side of the people who still lean towards the official story.


And yet they fail to call an ARINC Expert, instead they elect to remain anonymous attempting to find documentation to support their "hypothesis".

Clearly they both think "hypothesis" justifies this?

Unlike UM, we don't ban when people post reality, nor attempt to sweep reality under the rug, as was done at UM of one of our representatives (yes Scott you were right, WalkyrieWings is a Core member of P4T). Most of the people here are adults and can understand children are being killed based on "hypothesis" (yet refuse to accept "hypothesis" as justification). You may want to tell booNy and Cz to read our mission statement atop our home page which has been there since 2006.

Clearly booNy and Cz feel that "hypothesis" justifies all that has happened as a result of the events that took place on 9/11? If not, why are they offering hypothesis to explain their actions?


QUOTE
So for this reason and for the fact that he's helped keep the debate alive, I think that in a very real way, he's contributed to uncovering the truth on this matter.


All they have done was provide source documents which they thought supported their "hypothesis", but in reality corroborated what our experts have said since day 1.

Since the cat is half way out the bag... we played Cz and booN to do the legwork finding the sources via the net, as we knew they didn't have the expertise to interpret the information, instead we knew they would interpret the documents based on their confirmation bias and have nothing but speculation to offer. They did an excellent job gathering document to support real and verified experts.

This is one of the reasons Cz and booN will never come here, nor amount to anything on this topic. But, we will continue to use them...

smile.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
scott75
post Dec 5 2011, 07:34 PM
Post #37





Group: Troll
Posts: 271
Joined: 6-November 08
Member No.: 3,971



QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Dec 5 2011, 02:06 AM) *
And yet they fail to call an ARINC Expert, instead they elect to remain anonymous attempting to find documentation to support their "hypothesis".


From my experience, you're not actually supposed to call ARINC experts, atleast not ones that are on the job. That doesn't mean that they won't talk to you sometimes (as in the case with the SFO expert), but in my second call, they told me that I should send an email instead. So I did. booN has done this as well. I haven't received a response yet and as far as I know, neither has booN.

QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Dec 5 2011, 02:06 AM) *
Clearly they both think "hypothesis" justifies this?


No, they don't. They just don't think that your evidence is that strong. I think they just can't properly interpret the data they already have, which you have told them more then once. I'm trying to explain things to them as best I can. This is difficult for me, because I have yet to fully comprehend some facets of ACARS myself, but together, I think we're learning.

QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Dec 5 2011, 02:06 AM) *
Unlike UM, we don't ban when people post reality, nor attempt to sweep reality under the rug, as was done at UM of one of our representatives (yes Scott you were right, WalkyrieWings is a Core member of P4T).


Woot :-)! Nice to get guesses right. Anyway, I haven't seen any real indication that that's what they're really trying to do. It's just that.. once, I had more or less cornered an official story supporter concerning World Trade Center 7. He was already a little shaky concerning the official story on that building, but he tried anyway. At one point, I just said that I was embarassed for him; even he had a hard time swallowing his own arguments. It was at that point, like a cornered animal, that I heard him say what may have been the most truthful thing I've ever heard said from an official story supporter. He said something like 'Imagine that your own mother was accused of murder. That's what this sounds like'. And suddenly, it all clicked into place. The ridiculous evasions, the pitiful defenses, all of it. And I truly felt sorry for him, and all the people who have can't bear the possibility that an element of the government was truly complicit in all of this. And I also realized how I had got him to confess such a truth. I had been gentle with him, gentle enough for him to say something which, if you think about it, put him in a very vulnerable place.

QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Dec 5 2011, 02:06 AM) *
Most of the people here are adults and can understand children are being killed based on "hypothesis" (yet refuse to accept "hypothesis" as justification). You may want to tell booNy and Cz to read our mission statement atop our home page which has been there since 2006.


Yes, I know, "We do not offer theory or point blame at this point in time." But would you agree that once you start down the rabbit hole, it's almost impossible to go back? I have heard of -very- few cases in forums where people who start questioning the official story can come away thinking that the government wasn't complicit in what happened. At present, I know of one such case. The really does come up with some novel theories to explain things, but she is truly the exception to the rule. The rest are either on one side or the other. It reminds me of a guy who generally supported the official story who admitted that he wasn't sure what happened in the JFK assassination. An official story supporter scoffed at his lack of faith and he backed off nervously, not wanting to lose his place on the official story side of things.

QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Dec 5 2011, 02:06 AM) *
Clearly booNy and Cz feel that "hypothesis" justifies all that has happened as a result of the events that took place on 9/11?


I haven't seen any evidence for that.

QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Dec 5 2011, 02:06 AM) *
If not, why are they offering hypothesis to explain their actions?


It's one thing to question the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. It's another to question whether the official story concerning 9/11 was true. Because while one is far away, the other is at your doorstep.

QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Dec 5 2011, 02:06 AM) *
All they have done was provide source documents which they thought supported their "hypothesis", but in reality corroborated what our experts have said since day 1.


Yes, but they don't yet understand this.

QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Dec 5 2011, 02:06 AM) *
Since the cat is half way out the bag... we played Cz and booN to do the legwork finding the sources via the net, as we knew they didn't have the expertise to interpret the information, instead we knew they would interpret the documents based on their confirmation bias and have nothing but speculation to offer. They did an excellent job gathering document to support real and verified experts.

This is one of the reasons Cz and booN will never come here, nor amount to anything on this topic. But, we will continue to use them...

smile.gif


Czero was.. let's just say he was very upset with that comment you made. I didn't quote it, he came over here and saw it. Now he says he refuses to participate in the discussion anymore. I'm going to try to do some damage control. I think I'll tell him a line from "The Sirens of Titan". Near the ending of the book, a woman is furious that she was used by some intergalactic space aliens for their purpose. Her husband tells her something like, 'that's not so bad. The worst thing is being useless'. I think you'll agree that of all the official story supporters in UM, he was the one who got closest to truly understanding ACARS. He really worked hard to get to that point. I don't want to lose him.

This post has been edited by scott75: Dec 5 2011, 07:35 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
scott75
post Dec 5 2011, 07:38 PM
Post #38





Group: Troll
Posts: 271
Joined: 6-November 08
Member No.: 3,971



QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Dec 4 2011, 02:47 AM) *
Conversely, Dennis is an ACARS expert, not a Dispatcher, I wouldn't expect him to know exactly what the time stamps mean at United Airlines when the messages can be tailored to the needs of United. But Dennis certainly knows how they are routed, and as he has stated from the beginning corroborated by source documents, the messages would not be routed through MDT and PIT if the aircraft were in NY, regardless if they are received or not.


Before Czero went into a funk concerning what I mentioned previously, he asked me if you could provide these source documents. I'd like to see them myself as well.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Dec 5 2011, 08:06 PM
Post #39



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,709
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (scott75 @ Dec 5 2011, 06:34 PM) *
Yes, I know, "We do not offer theory or point blame at this point in time."


I was referring to....

"We do not accept the 9/11 Commission Report and/or "hypothesis" as a satisfactory explanation for the sacrifice every American has made and continues to make -- some more than others. "


It's been there for 5 years on the top of our home page.


QUOTE
He said something like 'Imagine that your own mother was accused of murder. That's what this sounds like'.


Yes, that is textbook Cognitive Dissonance. Classic denial. Many who spend their days and nights arguing with people who they think are nuts for questioning the govt story regarding 911, suffer from this....

QUOTE
Czero was.. let's just say he was very upset with that comment you made.


Boo hoo... cry me a river... if he contacted an ARINC Expert as suggested since day 1, we wouldn't have had him jumping through hoops to find source documents which we knew would corroborate the claims of our expert. The documents are listed in the footnotes of our Article, Cat A and B flight tracking specifically. Cz was in denial since day 1 from the time he didn't think messages were sent automatically, till today.... He has had a stick up his ass since he was schooled on Equivalent airspeed months ago.

This post has been edited by rob balsamo: Dec 5 2011, 08:32 PM
Reason for edit: edit for clarity
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
scott75
post Dec 6 2011, 03:19 AM
Post #40





Group: Troll
Posts: 271
Joined: 6-November 08
Member No.: 3,971



QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Dec 5 2011, 07:06 PM) *
QUOTE (scott75 @ Dec 5 2011, 06:34 PM) *

QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Dec 5 2011, 02:06 AM) *

Most of the people here are adults and can understand children are being killed based on "hypothesis" (yet refuse to accept "hypothesis" as justification). You may want to tell booNy and Cz to read our mission statement atop our home page which has been there since 2006.


Yes, I know, "We do not offer theory or point blame at this point in time."


I was referring to....
"We do not accept the 9/11 Commission Report and/or "hypothesis" as a satisfactory explanation for the sacrifice every American has made and continues to make -- some more than others. "

It's been there for 5 years on the top of our home page.


Well, he's read this message already, so I imagine he's read that part of it.

QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Dec 5 2011, 07:06 PM) *
Yes, that is textbook Cognitive Dissonance. Classic denial. Many who spend their days and nights arguing with people who they think are nuts for questioning the govt story regarding 911, suffer from this....


He seems better than most regarding this. He's never called anyone I know nuts anyway...

QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Dec 5 2011, 07:06 PM) *
Boo hoo... cry me a river... if he contacted an ARINC Expert as suggested since day 1, we wouldn't have had him jumping through hoops to find source documents which we knew would corroborate the claims of our expert.


I'm not sure that ARINC representatives would have been so helpful as to show him the location of documents. And it seems that the woman that I spoke to in SFO was unusually helpful; the second person I spoke to simply said that their office wasn't meant to handle inquiries from the public and directed me to email them (I'm still waiting on that reply). Then there's skyeagle. Perhaps he didn't get an ACARS expert, but he did try.. and whoever he got seemed to confirm whatever he thought.. he even said that -you- should call ARINC. I think that, ultimately, it was a good thing that he got those source documents. No one needs to call ARINC for them and hope they'll get a receptive ARINC representative, they can just read them direct.

QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Dec 5 2011, 07:06 PM) *
The documents are listed in the footnotes of our Article, Cat A and B flight tracking specifically.


Yep. I quoted that section in the Global Link issue over at UM.

QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Dec 5 2011, 07:06 PM) *
Cz was in denial since day 1 from the time he didn't think messages were sent automatically, till today.... He has had a stick up his ass since he was schooled on Equivalent airspeed months ago.


Cz responded to this and asked me to quote him or link his response to this point. I remember you saying you didn't want any links to that forum on your board, so I've sent you the link in a PM.

This post has been edited by scott75: Dec 6 2011, 03:21 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

10 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 > » 
Closed TopicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 




RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 31st October 2014 - 06:08 PM