Open Discussion Suggestion, to benefit the Pentagon investigation.

JDX,

Hey I have an idea.

Would you be willing to allow 2 JREFer's limited access to a debate thread with you on the FDR data?

Some of us here just don't get exposed to a second opinion on this stuff.

When you compared me to them and suggested I go over there, I did some reading. Some of them appear to be employed in the aerospace industry and pretty knowledgeable.

They have some ideas and formulas that indicate some different conclusions that seem reasonable.

As you've pointed out I am not that bright at this aerospace stuff and a couple of others have been told they don't know what they're talking about either. Since those of us here are not exposed to this stuff much, I thought it might help us understand the issues better.

We would know who they are and that they are taking the position of skeptics in advance. They would also only have limited access to the debate thread and would not "troll" the boards.

It seems like a good idea and with the facts you would be able to convince them of your interpretation of the data putting this all to rest.

Would you be open to doing that?

Is anybody else interested in seeing an open discussion like this? The truth has nothing to fear.

Russell

http://z9.invisionfree.com/Pilots_For_Trut...dpost&p=3492909

Dated Sept 22. Still waiting.

Still waiting for you to address this report as well...

This last conclusion makes ALOT of sense. "Disinformation campaigns containing numerous errors."

This site does it the right way. They took a govt report and went from there.

http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_F...dpost&p=7567582

Here is my page on the ASCE report.

http://www.pentagonresearch.com/bps.html

So if I organize a discussion of this nature here in the LC debate forum you will answer their questions?

Do you think UT would moderate it or something? He is detached and fair.

There is already interest on their part and they would abide by strict rules of professionalism. Just facts.

Do you have somebody in mind to work with you on this? That would be two people on each side.

Then we have to find a fair moderator. I would do it but it seems like you don't trust me for some reason.

This will be great.

I welcome the opportunity to debate. I welcome anyone that can try to explain why the FDR shows the aircraft at 480MSL. So far no one has been able to. I have read over their comments, and they are just that, comments and opinion. They use one theory to explain one thing forgetting that it creates another conflict. Then the usual omit, ignore, spin.

However, i dont think the admins here want JREFers on this site. That is why i have welcomed them to my site. It seems no one has taken the challenge due to the simple rules of no name calling.


As i said, i have spent over 4000 of my first posts battling JREFers in the old Skeptics forum. Im familiar with their spin and ridicule while not providing facts. If they want to debate, the challenge has been up there since Sept 22.

So even if they are limited to just the thread we can't allow 2 JREFer's temporary access to have the discussion here?

I would post Dylan's own words on his thoughts about JREFer's here but as you know that thread and his words were disappeared. He seemed to think it was OK. Is there a way to find his thoughts on that and post them?

I feel it is a great idea to have some dialogue with another point of view.

The truth can only benefit from this.....right?

Maybe we should use democracy and have a poll to see if the people here are open to seeing both sides of this discussion. If we end up collectively being afraid of a different opinion then fine we can withdraw into our own theories and ideas without exposing ourselves to new information.

It might be just me but I feel truth has nothing to fear.

Russ,

I know this may be hard for you to grasp... but please try really hard to understand this... the welcome is there, it has been there for awhile. In the debate forum here and on my site. We have debated all of it before...

Heres one debate with another pilot that ended up holding on to a mistake in spelling.
http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_F...opic=11235&st=0

Heres another debate that has been up since Sept 28
http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_F...showtopic=15306


And if they dont want to debate here on LC.. they have this place
http://z9.invisionfree.com/Pilots_For_Trut...hp?showforum=19

(note the amount of name calling in the Billzilla thread)

I understand the past. And you have called me names too so that is not a good example.

This would be different. It would be controlled and we would allow 2 representatives of their selection to have a fair discussion. Not get banned for having a different opinion.

I feel it should be done here in our forums so that we can all see it. It would only be the debate participants allowed to post under established rules.

Many of us have just been told to learn this and that we don't have educated opinions. We don't have time to learn it. Some of these people appear to be employed in the industry and have information that may expand our knowledge.

If the current interpretations are correct then they will have to skulk back to their own forums.

What can it hurt?

Russ.. .THE THREADS ARE THERE! IN THE DEBATE FORUM. THIS BOARD. THE LOOSE CHANGE FORUM.


Does anyone have a bull horn to go over to Russ and say the above sentence in his ear really loud? Perhaps he will get it...


Russ, read the threads in the debate forum. Most has been debated. You want to invite them over, be my guest. The threads are there waiting as they have been. Read them...

Hi, my name is Anti-sophist.

I worked as an instrumentation engineer with the USAF (as a civilian). I'll be happy to look at your calculations in detail (I've already done so, repeatedly, in a shallow respect), and give you my honest evaluation. For the sake of full disclosure: I am a "skeptic" by every definition of the word, and a JREFer by you all's definition. However, none of those affiliations are paramount to my role as an engineer or scientist. I draw conclusions based on the evidence, and if the evidence changes, so will my conclusions. I consider my "skepticism" to be the the result of looking at the evidence, not the bias I bring to its analysis. You'll need to judge my honesty, for yourself, over time.

My only "rules" for any "debate" is that the goal is to get the science right, first, and draw conclusions last. Also, the debate needs to be about the science, and intellectually honest. I'm not in the business of sophistry or propaganda... getting the science right is all that should matter. Under those conditions, I'm willing to participate in any debate and/or discussion.

My expertise has to do with data aquisition systems, pcm data, and recording/telemetry devices. I've worked with tape and solid-state recorders, although never "crash survivable" ones. I do not claim to be an expert on issues like "pressure altitude" sensors and its calibration with respect to air speeds and lag and all that other stuff. That wasn't my business. My business was, very specifically, in reading data from instruments, storing the data returned, and telemetry. As such, any error related to the instrument must be dealt with post-decoding of the PCM data.

As such, I'm willing to discuss, specifically the FDR data. The CSV file released by the NTSB is the only data I have in possession. I understand there is also a '.fdr' file floating around which may contain raw data. If someone could provide me a link to that, I'd be happy to download that. Furthermore, does there exist, anywhere, the major-frame description of this raw data?

This post has been edited by Anti-sophist on Oct 11 2006, 08:39 PM

I think a controlled debate thread that is based on science sounds good. Let's start over and see what happens.

I'm really looking for the .fdr file raw dump, and the major frame description? Is this information available? I'd need all available data before seriously persuing this. Right now I have the CSV file, only.

Anti-S, I will PM you with the answers you seek.

ack, might not get to it tonight (typing), in the mean time, please review these threads

Bit level FDR

AA77 Flight Data, hard number and soft math

All About Alititude

Boeing refuses to decode

/thanks

This post has been edited by UnderTow on Oct 11 2006, 08:57 PM

I got:

The error returned was:

You do not have permission to view this topic

I sent Russell and email, so hopefully he'll send me the fdr data.

Hi Anti-S,

I have read some of your stuff over at JREF. I noticed your first chart had the poles impacted with a 200 foot X Axis the same size for a 20 foot Y axis.

Not very to scale.

Next, I noticed you havent addressed the pressure correction for the 173' end of data corrected for local pressure. Do you know the difference between True altitude and pressure altitude? If you dont.. this is going to take awhile and perhaps you should familiarize yourself with the different types of altitude before we proceed. I have a long thread addressing this issue with Russell if you need it.

You are right the graph wasn't spatially to scale, but all that changing the x-axis to equal the y-axis to scale would have done would be to "stretch" the graph and make it longer. It would change the slope of the lines, but not where any of them intersect (in proportion). I can reproduce a full to-scale graph quite easily if you wish.

But I think we are getting alot ahead of ourselves. I was operating on old data at the time, using very simple calculations based on alot of assumptions. There is much more information available than I used in those graphs, and I'm willing to look at my assumptions alot more carefully.

Moreover, I understand the differences you speak of. Maybe I need to be a bit more clear. I don't claim to be an expert in sensory, because that wasn't my job. I worked with many sensor experts, and picked up alot along the way, but it's not my specific area of expertise. I'm referring, here, to my professional experience. Please don't understand that to mean I am ignorant of the subject, though.

Please keep in mind the FDR is taking its recorded data directly off the ADC just as the altimeter, airspeed indicator and IVSI.

The animation shows real time input based on the recorded data provided by the NTSB.

We'll work from there.

Also to add,

Undertow can work with you as far as the computer aspect. I'll help with interpretations of the data as a pilot looking at an instrument.

I got:

The error returned was:

You do not have permission to view this topic

I sent Russell and email, so hopefully he'll send me the fdr data.

Here is the link that doesnt work for you...

OK.

I guess this discussion is going to take place here?

No banning if the rules are followed?

Or should it be organized and controlled with rules in the debate forum?

I do feel that if us observers could occasionally pop in with brief, concise questions it would be helpful for everybody.

Let me know how this should all work.

Russ.. just relax... so far its working.

We'll see how it goes. I'm interested in Anti-S's take. (although i have seen alot of his assumptions and spin on the JREF boards).

Just let it be the way it is. The rules of the board stand... period.

I just banned Anti-sophist. For being an admitted JREFer. JREFers are not welcome on this forum.

I repeat, JREFers are not welcome here.

Anyone who talks on their forum about alerting the FBI, NSA, CIA to the LC forum in hope of shutting this place down and seeing some of us killed (yes, they really were talking about that over there), or anyone that associates with people of that mind-set, are not welcome here. Period. In case anyone didn't get the memo.

JREFers will be banned on sight. As I just did. We welcome skeptics, but not JREFers.

Thank you all for your consideration.

oh well.. i guess that's that...


Seems Russ isnt too familiar with JREF tactics... or... perhaps he is... thats why he invited them here...

Good job.

I'm sure Russell knows how bad they consistently slander Dylan, Loose Change, and anyone who is a member of this forum throughout the internet.

They are obviously obsessed.

The funny part is.......we have a reason to be obsessed with 9/11....they are clearly fanatics with no lives to be so involved with something they deem to be nothing but a looney conspiracy theory.

Good call Sanders.

Those guys are definately a rare breed.

This post has been edited by slick on Oct 11 2006, 10:34 PM

Good job.

I'm sure Russell knows how bad they consistently slander Dylan, Loose Change, and anyone who is a member of this forum throughout the internet.

They are obviously obsessed.

The funny part is.......we have a reason to be obsessed with 9/11....they are clearly fanatics with no lives to be so involved with something they deem to be nothing but a looney conspiracy theory.

Dylan responds differently.

He welcomes the criticism and uses it to improve his film in every version.

One more loss of credibility for us.

That's funny.

I wonder why he never bothered to tell his admins this.

Good job.

I'm sure Russell knows how bad they consistently slander Dylan, Loose Change, and anyone who is a member of this forum throughout the internet.

They are obviously obsessed.

The funny part is.......we have a reason to be obsessed with 9/11....they are clearly fanatics with no lives to be so involved with something they deem to be nothing but a looney conspiracy theory.

Dylan responds differently.

He welcomes the criticism and uses it to improve his film in every version.

One more loss of credibility for us.

Why dont you let Dylan speak for himself Russ...

Constructive criticism is one thing...

Spin, ignorance, omitting facts to push an agenda is another.

Im not surprised you dont know the difference.. nor am i surprised you just cant fathom the possibility that it just may happen on a site such as this.