1. How many people are able to see a 6 foot long pole flying 10 miles away at 13,000 ft at dusk (no smoke or flame since its motor had burned out)
2. Just within this small sub-group of 182 witnesses you've got several significantly different descriptions of the same event. The eyewitnesses argument states that eyewitnesses can't be wrong. Well, even within this small subgroup of 733 witnesses to the event, several must be wrong. Which ones?
What does it matter how many can or can not see such a thing? Many of the statements speak of a "flare" "streak" or "firework" that a large majority saw "rise from the surface." What were they seeing? And why didn't the FBI or NTSB try to determine the 3D trajectory, or even the originating point, by triangulation.
It wouldn't matter if nobody could see supersonic pole 10' long, 10 miles away; they did see something. What was it?
2. Just within this small sub-group of 182 witnesses you've got several significantly different descriptions of the same event.
Why yes. The ones who were to the north said it was to the south, and the ones who were in the south put it towards the north. So, "some say it was south and some say it was north. Therefore, they saw nothing and the case is closed." Right?
The eyewitnesses argument states that eyewitnesses can't be wrong.
Wrong. Even if some are wrong, there is still a consensus about what they saw, unless all of them suddenly had a mass delusion. Even if each witness is only right 10% of the time, if there are 50 witnesses who simultaneously report a given event, there is a 99.48% that it actually happened. In this case, there are 96 witnesses who reported that the streak "rose from the surface." Here's the calculation.
Well, even within this small subgroup of 733 witnesses to the event, several must be wrong. Which ones?
It's far more likely that the 6 who said the streak originated in the air were mistaken, than the 96 who said it originated from the surface.
But even for those 6 people who saw it originate in the air, any which described it as a "streak" were probably not describing a 747 "in various stages of crippled flight" since the angular velocity of a 747 nearly 3 miles up, 10 or more miles away, is not nearly enough to look like "a streak."
So, the question remains, what did the witnesses see?