I see your paper is listed as "peer-reviewed" on '911scholars.org'.

[Make7]

http://911scholars.org/#peer

I am rather curious as to who exactly the peers were that allegedly reviewed your paper. The reason for my curiosity is that there are numerous errors throughout the paper that I would imagine should have been identified and corrected before "publishing".

Perhaps it is undergoing another review process - the link on the '911scholars.org' site doesn't seem to be working. Although the problem may just be an issue with splitting the old domain name into two separate sites. Either way, you should probably ask them why that link listed under "Peer-Reviewed Papers" doesn't actually link to a copy of your paper.

- Make7

[quicknthedead]

1. Why don't you instead answer the two questions just before your post.

Or are you running from the truth?

I say you are.



FOR THE WAGES OF SIN IS DEATH
BUT THE GIFT OF GOD IS ETERNAL LIFE THROUGH CHRIST JESUS OUR LORD

[Make7]

2. Should I assume you know nothing about the peer-review process...

... for your paper then? Apparently it wasn't too rigorous.

By the way, the link on the Scholars website still doesn't go to a copy of your paper.

quicknthedead wrote:

Why don't you instead answer the two questions just before your post.

I'm still unsure why you bother to respond to one of my posts simply to repeat things you have previously said while entirely ignoring what I have written. If you would rather not discuss it, why do you reply at all?

Post #84 by quicknthedead:

Is the NIST 8:46:30 seismic time correct? And what do you base your answer on?

The 8:46:30 impact time reported by NIST was based on video evidence. I believe that of the three data sets (seismic, video, radar), the times derived from video evidence are likely to be the most accurate.

The NIST impact time for the North Tower was based on a relative timeline they constructed using available video and photographic evidence and then aligned to the impact time of the plane crashing into the South Tower - which had been determined based on four different live news broadcasts of the event that had real-time clocks. The live news footage is available on the internet so anyone can readily calculate the second impact time independently using this method.

Post #85 by quicknthedead:

Is the 9/11 Commission 8:46:40 radar time correct? And what do you base your answer on?

Unknown. The source reported in the 9/11 Commission Report for their time is: NTSB report, "Flight Path Study-American Airlines Flight 11," Feb. 19, 2002. The summary of that report concludes: "The airplane impacted the North tower at approximately 8:46:40." Unless you have some credible information that could pinpoint that approximation to something more definite or at least give a margin of error for the time given, I don't believe you can state with any degree of certainty how accurate the 9/11 Commission Report time actually is.

- Make7

[quicknthedead]

3. Thanks for responding.

Your answer that the NIST 8:46:30 time is based upon video evidence is not entirely correct. The video evidence referenced, and assumed to have a true timestamp, is associated with fraud. This post explains why:
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?s=5707070ff1c2df0ef5d2f8c82472999f&showtopic=7444&view=findpost&p=161333

However, NIST's accepted revised LDEO seismic time of 8:46:29 (plus or minus 1 second, which NIST supposedly used to corroborate the video evidence and published as 8:46:30), is real and accurate.




Your understanding of the 8:46:40 from the 9/11 Commission, and radar in particular, is not complete. Here is why.

The FAA issued an approximate time of 8:46:40 because this was the time of the last primary radar return. However, it is "approximate" only because of the sweep of the radar antennae, which means it could have been up to six seconds after 8:46:40, but it could not have been before 8:46:40 because that was the time of the return.

This final radar return is visible on the page 4 graph from the NTSB report:
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB196/doc01.pdf

The return is also magnified in the paper on the top of page 7.
(Thanks for the broken link to the paper; here is one that works that goes to the Journal of 9/11 Studies.)
http://journalof911studies.com/volume/200609/ExplosionInTowerBeforeJetHitByFurlongAndRoss.pdf

The "approximate" aspect you mentioned, which I have explained above, is verified by former ATC Robin Hordon (who used to work out of the actual Boston station that tracked AA Flt 11) here in this post:
http://www.studyof911.com/forum/index.php?s=&showtopic=211&view=findpost&p=665

Mr. Hordon writes: "Therefore, if the NORAD/FAA/Military collected radar data shown in your work is to be trusted, it is exactly as it is...:46:40 or later for the collision, and, it should relate accurately to the seismic readings because they too are using the exact same GMT time reference."

In addition, all the radar tracks for all four flights were synchronized to the 84th RADES radar track, which had the complete radar data (from beginning to end) for all four flights, and thus all were synched to UTC.

http://www.911myths.com/Recorded_Radar_Data_Study--all_four_aircraft.pdf




Therefore, 8:46:40 and 8:46:30 are both accurate.

So:
What caused/was the 8:46:40 time?
Answer: The plane crash.

What caused/was the 8:46:30 time?
Answer: Explosions in the WTC1 sub-basements, which many witnesses experienced and confirmed.

If you must argue, do so with these facts and witnesses.

Regards,
Craig T. Furlong



THE FEAR OF THE LORD IS THE BEGINNING OF WISDOM

[Make7]

4. Assumptions and Interpretations.

Posted by quicknthedead:

Your answer that the NIST 8:46:30 time is based upon video evidence is not entirely correct. The video evidence referenced, and assumed to have a true timestamp, is associated with fraud. This post explains why:
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?s=5707070ff1c2df0ef5d2f8c82472999f&showtopic=7444&view=findpost&p=161333

However, NIST's accepted revised LDEO seismic time of 8:46:29 (plus or minus 1 second, which NIST supposedly used to corroborate the video evidence and published as 8:46:30), is real and accurate.

Do you understand what the word 'relative' means? (Please see my prior http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=124590&mesg_id=129033#129033">post outlining some of your errors concerning the NIST times.) In this case it means that if NIST used the Hlava video when constructing their relative timeline, they would not have used the timestamps to determine absolute times. The timestamp information shown on the Hlava video at the time of each impact does not even match the final times calculated by NIST. Shouldn't the times be the same if they used that video and it was "assumed to have a true timestamp"?

What is your position on the NIST impact time for WTC2? Just to refresh your memory, here are the relevant times for that event:

  Revised seismic time:       9:02:57 ±2 secs
  NIST video evidence time:   9:02:59 ±1 sec
  9/11 Commission radar time: 9:03:11 (no margin of error given)

Perhaps you have some reasonable explanation as to why the 9/11 Commission time based on radar data seems to be the only one in disagreement.

Posted by quicknthedead:

Your understanding of the 8:46:40 from the 9/11 Commission, and radar in particular, is not complete. Here is why.

The FAA issued an approximate time of 8:46:40 because this was the time of the last primary radar return. However, it is "approximate" only because of the sweep of the radar antennae, which means it could have been up to six seconds after 8:46:40, but it could not have been before 8:46:40 because that was the time of the return.

This final radar return is visible on the page 4 graph from the NTSB report:
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB196/doc01.pdf

It is the publicly available information regarding the radar data that is not complete. I said it is unknown how accurate the 9/11 Commission's time is because they have not stated by what method they determined their time, nor did they release the data that they used, nor did they provide a margin of error.

You are assuming that the last radar return was 8:46:40 based on your interpretation of the NTSB altitude profile graph - an interpretation that is not necessarily correct.

On further examination you may notice that there seems to be a number of missing radar returns just prior to what you claim is the last return. There is a gap of almost 30 seconds between that last data point and the one that immediately precedes it. Don't you think there should there be at least two radar returns between them given the frequency of the data prior to that point? Did the radar suddenly lose the aircraft and then reacquire the signal for that last radar return almost 30 seconds later at an altitude of zero feet? I was under the impression that the plane impacted the North Tower at an altitude of well over 1000 feet.

Do you also believe that Flight 11 crashed at 8:40:07 and 8:42:28? And 8:43:00 and 8:43:10? There are radar returns indicating the altitude was zero feet at those times as well. I would like to know exactly how you determined that the reading that you are claiming was the last radar return is not a false reading. My opinion is that you are assuming it is correct with regards to the time information simply because that interpretation appears to support your theory.

- Make7