This isn't a coverup. It is clear that these "non-expert" witnesses just don't always know how to interpret what they are actually seeing. The Flight 800 crash was rife with the same type of "eyewitness" accounts.
With that crash people thought they saw a missle rising up to the plane when what they were really seeing was the plane itself rising after the nose came off.
Likewise, in thig case they did, in fact see the plane engulfed in a fireball, but that is because they saw it AFTER it hit the ground and then bounced high in the air, making it look like it caught on fire before it ever hit the ground.
I'm sure the FBI can do one of those computer simulation thingies that makes it look really real.
Few casual observers ever take into acount what investigators call the BM, or "Bounce Factor."
Oops. Two things: BM = BF
and < /sarcasm >
>>...Likewise, in thig case they did, in fact see the plane engulfed in a fireball, but that is because they saw it AFTER it hit the ground and then bounced high in the air, making it look like it caught on fire before it ever hit the ground...<<
Pardon me, but I find this rather hard to believe.
You're saying that the plane "bounced" after hitting the ground and THEN the witnessess saw the middle of the fuselage on fire?????
In all the films/videos of air crashes (at air shows, etc) I've NEVER seen a plane "bounce" intact enough where an eyewitness would REMOTELY think they were witnessing an event PRIOR to a crash. Sheesh.
You were right the first time: The Bounce Factor is BM.