Replies

Your statement about flawed radar data is interesting. The major flaw is where the NTSB masked real data with 102000 data. It was a nice try, but no cigar. They left in enough to tell what was happening. Apparently the underlings at the NTSB were fed up with what their bosses were doing and snuck in bits and pieces to show some honor amongst thieves.

OK. I guess I can sum up your reading of the radar data (upon which rests your whole case) by saying that you believe the only accurate representation of the P-3 is what is depicted by the upside down blue triangles on Page 42. Yet, you don't believe that the numbers the blue triangles are based on mean anything despite the fact that they correspond directly with the upside down blue triangles on page 42. You believe that uniformily displacing the patterns created by plotting the numbers provided to the NTSB (not by the NTSB) gives the true picture. You choose to ignore the other 7 sets of data for the same target for reasons you haven't provided. Once you've displaced your sets of faulty data, it will be obviously apparent that the P-3 was dragging something. Does that about sum it up?

Well, Barf, if we just continue along that theme I can uniformily shift sets of data points to spell out "Barf is not an engineer" and will probably be more accurate. Let me be the first to contribute $100 to a fund that will provide you with an all expenses paid trip to visit Washington D.C. so that you can explain your analysis to the Senator, Congressman or Cabinet official of your choice. But I have one condition...The meeting has to be on video and I get distribution rights for the video.

"The major flaw is where the NTSB masked real data with 102000 data"

Here's a little test for you. What does the number 102000 represent, and where did the NTSB get that number?