Posted on 07/23/2004 12:03:52 PM PDT by philosofy123
I'm pretty sure the commission announced that they saw everything, including what the Bergler took. (And, I know there have been differing accounts, but I thought it was established that Bergler took copies, not originals.)
Actually, I obviously read them more closely than you. Otherwise, you wouldn't be making false claims about them. Here's some info from the site you linked...Of 755 witnesses, 183 said they saw a "streak of light". Of those 183, 102 gave a source of origin. Of those, 96 said it originated from the surface. Of those, only 40 said it originated from the sea. So only 40 of 755 witnesses describe a streak of light rising from the ocean. That's not "over 100 witnesses," making "almost identical descriptions of a surface to air missle launch". That's about 5% saying they saw a streak of light. The rest gave every other imaginable description of a single event resulting in such a confused picture that taken as a whole, the eyewitness testimony was determined to be largely useless by the various organizations investigating the incident.
"2. The "zoom-climb" is impossible without a nose."
Reread your own description of the events. The CG slips aft. The tail goes down (the aircraft begins a climb). Until the wings stall (within mere seconds) they create lift. The increased lift combined with decreased weight causes the aircraft to climb. Which it does. For a net increase of about 1200 ft. The incorrect assumption made by many "experts" often quoted from the internet, is that with an aircraft the size of a 747, any major change in angle of attack (ie. stalling) could happen "instantly". The fuselage of the 747 is not built to take that kind of loading, and it would disintegrate. Based on the pattern of debris found on the ocean floor, TWA 800 did not start to break up until well into the sequence of events following the initial explosion. Another false assumption is that if an aircraft "stalls" it immediately falls from the sky. Any object can "fly" a ballistic trajectory. Unless TWA 800 lost all its kenetic energy at the moment of explosion (an event that would have pulverized it and everything in it) it "flew" the remainder of the ballistic arc it started before its wings stalled. And as long as we're discussing Boeing, they fully concurred with the break up sequence as described in the NTSB report.
"3."
You're kidding right? Some guy cooking Jet A in a crab pot over a propane burner is supposed to convince me that Jet A flammability tests from Boeing, California Institute of Technology, Southwest Research Institute, FAA William J. Hughes Technical Center, The University of Nevada at Reno, Arizona State University, and the U.S. Air Force are all a lie? Nice try.
Sorry, but you never left 25%.
The people of influence, who conduct campaigns of disinformation, and misinformation are in need to make sure any one who suspect conspiracy be labeled a NUTCASE! That is the only way that they can continue on doing cover ups and conspire to lie to the public. You want to know the truth soldier...YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!! A la Jack Nicolson?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.