And where does it say 96 witnesses saw a streak of light rise from the ground toward the plane? I'll help you out...it doesn't.
From the NTSB URL that you provide and the LINK that I provided.....
* Of the 183(note that only 458 of the 755 interviewed by the FBI are addressed by the NTSB) who observed a streak of light, 102 gave information about the origin of the streak. Six said the streak originated from the air, and 96 said that it originated from the surface. Of the 96 who said it originated from the surface, 40 said it originated from the sea and 10 said it originated from land.
If you expect me to know what you meant, I think it is only fair to expect you to know what he meant. Just like I meant link when I said URL. Since I was complaining that you didn't provide one, you could deduce that I meant link.
Since he was talking about hundreds of witnesses (183) that thought they saw the missile you could deduce he didn't mean just the 10 who said it came from the ground.
In all three cases, we didn't say what we meant. However what we meant was easy enough to figure out.
You... wanted my comments on your post 148.
I have no comments on your technical statements in post 148. I don't know.
You did concede..."The Islip radar may have picked up debris to the right of the aircraft, but it isn't a missile warhead. "
From the NTSB Exhibit 4A.....
"* One hundred twenty-eight witnesses reported an immediate end of the streak, 85 described it ending in an explosion, 32 said it ended in a fireball, and 11 said it ended in a flash."
Sounds like it could have been a missile. Wouldn't you agree?
What would happen to the debris from the missile. It would seem to me that at a minimum it would keep debris from the target from moving in the direction the missile came from.
If the tank exploded from a spark, why would the debris go to the right?
I honestly didn't know you meant link instead of url. I'm not very well versed in the whole html thing, and though I have looked up how to post links in the past, I find it easier just to cut and paste the url. Yes, I guess that makes me lazy.
"I have no comments on your technical statements in post 148. I don't know." Fair enough. But it's a little frustrating that you produce post after post accusing me of being a disruptor and telling me my credibility is suffering when you won't even discuss the information you introduce.
"Sounds like it could have been a missile. Wouldn't you agree?"
Or, it could have been a burning 747 that subsequently exploded. I highly recommend you read the NTSB final report concerning the witness statements. Here is the url:
http://www.ntsb.gov/Publictn/2000/AAR0003.pdf
As I have previously stated, it has a very good analysis of the witness statements starting on page 229 including how the NTSB defined "streak of light".
What would happen to the debris from the missile.
It depends on the missile. The warheads for most missiles are located about 1/3 of the way down the missile body. Newer missiles are designed to take advantage of any remaining fuel in the missile to maximize their destructive impact. After they explode, very little is left. Especially if, as CMDR Donaldson suggests, the missile actually impacted TWA 800 at a nearly perpendicular angle.
"If the tank exploded from a spark, why would the debris go to the right?"
Take another look at the radar data in depicted in Donaldson's article from your post #140. TWA 800 was moving at 360kts or 6 nm per minute. The radar sweep updated every 5 seconds, during which time TWA 800 would have moved 1/2 a mile. The first piece of "missile" data Donaldson identifies appears at 31:16.22. TWA 800 appears on the same sweep at 31:16.49 about 1/2 a mile away from the "missile" debris which has barely moved laterally from the course flown by TWA 800. If a missile blew debris at "high velocity" from the right side of the aircraft, how come the debris doesn't show greater displacement from the plane's flightpath. In the next three sweeps the debris barely moves at all. So are we to assume it left the aircraft at high velocity, only to stop 10 seconds later? The debris then continues to drift at exactly the same rate and direction as all the other debris as TWA 800 continues to break up. What the radar really shows are returns from pieces of TWA 800 leaving through the belly of the aircraft after the explosion inside the CWT initiated a chain of events that eventually caused the nose of the aircraft to seperate. CMDR Donaldson proves once again why his analysis is never considered by any source other than WND. He may have been a nice guy, but his analysis of the whole TWA 800 incident is worthless.