Debunk this..

[Anti-sophist]

double

[Anti-sophist]

[johndoex]

You make these claims that "CTists" debunked the altimeter analysis. You make these claims that people are laughing at the analysis. You make these claims i am wrong... over and over again. You make these claims that you have "debunked" an analysis. Yet you offer nothing. You source nothing. You quote no one. You can say it as many times as you want.. you may sell it to yourself.. but others have a brain. It could be why i get emails regularly from aviation professionals wanting to join our organization. You are the only CTist here. Please quote one conspiracy theory listed on pilotsfor911truth.org. Thanks...

Here.. lets make this simple A-S.

Yes or no.. nothing else. Just a Yes or No will do. Dont tell us WHY.. just YES or NO.

1. Do you work for the NTSB? Yes or no

2. Do you work for the PENTBOM team at the FBI? Yes or no.

3. Does the altimeter in the csv file show 173 feet pressure altitude at 09:37:44? Yes or no

4. Does the animation show the altimeter at 180 feet at 13:37:44 UTC? Yes or no

5. Does the Flight Path in the animation show north of the official story flight path? Yes or no

If you answer anything BUT yes or no.. we will know all you want to do is spin.

Just Yes or no. The average layman cant understand what is involved even looking at the data produced by the NTSB. So, lets just get the above out of the way first.. just yes or no.


Again.. nothing else.. but yes or no.. can you do that?

then we'll move on.

and again.. its spelled "incompetent".. not "incompetant". I told you this before. Try to pay attention.. it makes you look like a retard. Especially doing it 3 more times after being corrected.

ETA: What is your name.. phone number and company you work for. I'll be happy to give you a call. .and we can record it. Email it to me if you are too timid to display it in public as i have.

[Anti-sophist]

[johndoex]

Just as i thought...

I see the JREFers are now even denying im even me! and they call us deniers...

[chipmunk stew]

[johndoex]

Since the OCTists (read: JREFers) watch this thread and are now coming up with all kinds of conspiracy theories about me.... i'll address some issues while im here...

My Commercial was issued May 96.

Multiengine - July 96

CFI - 10/96

CFII - 3/97

MEI - 6/97

Flight Instructor certificates expire every 2 years. I renewed it twice (which is basically a quick check ride with an examiner.. they call it the 100 dollar Hamburger Ride because its a piece of cake... or you can take a written.. or if you are a Capt at an airline an FAA examiner will just renew it with the stroke of a pen.. you dont have to go through the whole training course again).

I got hired at ACA in July of 2000. I had 3 upgrade classes that cancelled. 1 due to Sept 11, the second due to United Bankruptcy (due to Sept 11), and the 3 due to FLYI start-up and subsequent furloughs. I took a voluntary furlough for a year due to my health problems and to save the job of a junior pilot. I was planning on going back to FLYI March 2006. But the company closed doors Jan 06.

My medical is still valid as a Class 3. Anyone who knows how medicals work knows that a Class 1 switches to a Class 2 and then to Class 3 if not renewed. Medical is valid till May of 2007 as Class 3 privileges. I can get a Class 1 today if i want to.. along with renewing my CFI... all it takes is 200-300 dollars and a scheduled appointment. I have grounded myself due to health problems. But if a JREFer wants to send the cash.. i can get it all renewed by Friday if it makes you feel better. Donation buttons are on pilotsfor911truth.org. Send 500 just in case more is needed. I'll refund anything not used.

Chipmunk.. please post this over there so the Official Conspiracy Theorists dont make themselves look more like idiots...

(think he'll post it? probably not..)

[johndoex]

JREF denial...

Poll: Is Rob "JDX" an Airline pilot? Has he ever been one?

Yes - 8
No - 29

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=66224



I cant count how many times i told these people to wait till they have ALL the facts. Typical...

Have fun folks... till next time!

Cheers!
Rob
"JDX"

[Anti-sophist]

Most people, especially at JREF, have the mistaken notion that all professionals are competent, and thus they had a hard time believing that a professional pilot could be so incompetent. I have no such delusions and have met people at every level of success with varying levels of intellect.

I've never doubted that you are who you say you are. It doesn't change my opinion, really, to find out that you are who you say you are. I continue to follow the same mantra.. analysis is what matters. So far you have none that stands up to mild scrutiny. You've been promising me more thorough analysis is in the works, so I'm looking forward to it.

I want to see a nice, well put-together, well researched, well documented explanation of your side of the story. I don't think that's too much to ask, especially now that you are asking for money. Unfortunately you seem to think that a well-produced movie (a la Loose Change) is more important than a well researched document. That's borderline sophistry, but I'll withhold judgment until I see something worth talking about.

[johndoex]

Fact: The NTSB produced data/animation shows the aircraft too high to hit the poles.

Fact: The NTSB produced data/animation shows the aircraft north of the physical damage path.

Fact: The NTSB produced this data/animation from the raw FDR file, Radar, and ATC transmissions.

Fact: A-S says the NTSB corrects for errors everyday.

Fact: A-S says the raw FDR file doesnt have any errors.

Fact: Snowygrouch confirms the accuracy of FDR produced data in his call to an FDR expert in the UK.. "Incredibly accurate" was the term used.

Fact: The US Govt needs to answer for these conflicts with the official story. Not some guy on the net saying it "may have errors"

Fact: Everyone knows who i am, my background and the members of our team. Including Accident Investigators from the US Air Force who have put their name on it.

Fact: No one knows who A-S is.. his analysis is shady at best. His agenda appears to "muddy the waters" for the average layman.

Fact: A-S brushes with a broad stroke.. lumping pilotsfor911truth.org into the likes of wacky Conspiracy theories.

Fact: There is not one theory on pilotsfor911truth.org.

Fact: All analysis is presented professionally with links to all data on the pentagon page of pilotsfor911truth.org

[Anti-sophist]

So is that your thorough analysis you've been promising for months? Or is something better coming? I hope not because it's full of holes, as usual.

Let me know when the real document comes out, because I'm getting tired of repeating myself to you.

Here are some fun tidbits for you to stew over. Make sure your upcoming "documents" deals with the following:

FACT: The animation is not a perfect reconstruction of what happened on 9/11

FACT: The animation is not even a perfect reconstruction of the FDR data

[johndoex]

Fact: The tax dollars of the people who want answers from our govt regareding 9/11 outweigh A-S's tax dollars.

[Anti-sophist]

[johndoex]

[johndoex]

[chipmunk stew]

[johndoex]

[chipmunk stew]

I posted the facts without spin. That's how you like it, right?
Okay, here's the spin I snipped out:

[johndoex]

[Anti-sophist]

Yawn. Ok. Someone wake me up when JDX or his crew has something new to say. Repeating the same tired and debunked claims while promising new and future surprises is boring.

[scubadiver]

[Johnny Pixels]

I repeat the question. Why would the government choose to release evidence that incriminates itself? If the data was badly faked it would come out perfect, if it was well faked it would have a few errors, but still prove the point very precisely. If it wasn't faked at all then it would come out as it has, inconclusive without further analysis.

[Anti-sophist]

[johndoex]

Time to play with the deniers at JREF..

Apathoid quote -
http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=2078005&postcount=25

[chipmunk stew]

[Snowygrouch]

Dear All,
When I get the .fdr file decoded (and I WILL) I`ll make sure the results are posted here first and we can all have a jolly nice time reading through a couple of million lines on Excel.

Until then it is true that we cannot make 100% asertions; however to dismiss them as not worthy of futher effort is a poor choice. It is a shame that a small group of persons are insisting of posting purile rubbish on the forums which denegrates the merit of the small band of serious researchers such as myself who are genuiney interested enough to explore new data; no matter what its results.

(this does not -in this case- refer to those who post in Critics Corner; a corner of the forums I`ve been fairly close to moving to recently thanks to the efforts of the afore-metioned persons)

Regardless, Enjoy N-year

Right I`m off to get a nice bottle of Vodka.

C.