Occam's Razor and the WTC Impact Times Discrepancies

[Wokeman]

Edited on Tue Aug-15-06 05:13 PM by mhatrw
WTC-1 "Impact" Times

8:46:26 +/-1 sec: LDEO's seismic evidence and 9:02:54+/-2 seconds
8:46:30 +/-1 sec: NIST's video evidence
8:46:40 (no MOE): 9/11 Commission's air traffic control evidence

WTC-2 "Impact" Times

9:02:54 +/-2 sec: LDEO's seismic evidence and 9:02:54+/-2 seconds
9:02:59 +/-1 sec: NIST's video evidence
9:03:11 (no MOE): 9/11 Commission's air traffic control evidence

Considering just WTC-1 to simplify the analysis (although the analysis works almost exactly the same and the timing discrepancies are even greater for WTC-2):

The seismic evidence, consisting of a clear 0.9 magnitude seismic event picked up at a LCSN station just 21 miles away from the World Trade Center, demonstrates an "impact" time with a published and peer reviewed uncertainty within one second. This is the hardest scientific evidence, and the hardest evidence to fake. Seismographs don't pick up clear seismic events without some sort of seismic disturbance. There absolutely must have been some sort of seismic event in the near vicinity of the LCSN station within a few seconds of this published time. If this seismic event occurred at the exact location of the World Trade Center (an assumption which nobody has yet disputed), then it must have happened within the published one second margin of error. This is basic and indisputable seismology.

NIST, using the timestamps from multiple video cameras that supposedly recorded this impact arrived an impact time that was a full FOUR seconds later than the baseline, rock solid seismic evidence. Furthermore, NIST claims in its peer reviewed publication that the timestamps from the disparate video cameras they examined were synchronized together to produce a margin of error of less than one second.

The 9/11 Commission, using NYC airspace air traffic control radar, NTSB analysis, and infrared satellite data which are (and which must be) typically precise to the second, arrived at an impact time a full TEN seconds later than NIST's +/- one second video-derived impact time and a full FOURTEEN seconds later than the baseline, rock solid +/- one second seismic evidence. To put this in perspective, consider that a 767 traveling at its economical cruising speed of 525 mph travels over 2 full miles in fourteen seconds.

Assuming that at least most of the staff members of the 9/11 Commission and NIST scientists and video technicians who studied this matter acted in good faith, let's list the known facts:

1) There was a clear 0.9 magnitude seismic event in the near vicinity of the LCSN station within a few seconds of 8:46:26. If it occurred at the exact location of the World Trade Center, then this seismic event must have happened between 8:46:25 and 8:46:27.

2) The video footage that NIST examined synchronized so well that it led NIST's scientists to conclude that the WTC-1 impact actually occurred between 8:46:29 and 8:46:31.

3) The air traffic control radar, NTSB analysis, and infrared satellite data that the 9/11 Commission analyzed led the 9/11 Commission to conclude that the impact of WTC-1 happened at 8:46:40 and the accuracy of this data was of comprehensive and persuasive enough to the Commission that they both ignored the seismic evidence discrepancy and listed no margin of error whatsoever. Note that in the case of Flight 93, the 9/11 Commission explicitly determined that its air traffic control and satellite data analysis was superior to published seismic evidence with these words, "the 10:03:11 time is supported by evidence from the (9/11 Commission) staff’s radar analysis, ... NTSB analysis, and infrared satellite data."

The simplest and easiest way to explain the conflicts in these three precise data sets (if one allows oneself to logically consider all possibilities) is to conclude that, although the NIST's video engineers and most of the 9/11 Commission staff members analyzing the data they were provided acted in good faith, the evidence that both of these groups were supplied was faked. Furthermore, while this evidence was faked very professionally, the various intelligence assets that faked this evidence were not in perfect communication with each other (as the 9/11 Commission suggested), and therefore were unable to perfectly synchronize their fakery.

As for why the video as well as the air traffic control evidence would need to be faked, I wouldn't hasten to speculate except to mention that this line speculation provides an alternative explanation for the indisputable 0.9 magnitude seismic event: an explosion that rocked the entire WTC-1 so that the building perceptibly swayed was necessary in order to provide the illusion that the tower had just been slammed into by a 767.

Personally, I don't think this line of speculation provides any benefit for those of us demanding a full and independent investigation of 9/11 to answer the myriad of unanswered questions about the worst attack on US soil in the last century. However, it is the simplest explanation for the conflicting times of impact and as such needs to be taken into profound consideration by anyone trying to "analyze" away these discrepancies.

Courtesy: Democratic Underground