Thursday, November 8, 2007


Adam Larson / Caustic Logic
The Frustrating Fraud
Nov 8 2007
last update 11/12/1pm

Deserving of special mention at this blog at this time is statistician, video analyst, and Pentagon attack researcher John Farmer. I first encountered his works as cited by Pilot for 9/11 Truth as supporting their silliness – my initial and flippant suspicions about this GOP-oriented conservative Truther ‘expert’ was soon confused at best as I saw him make some really good points and brought some new data and thoughts to the table. In addition to a lot of exceptional, top-shelf analysis, he’s made some bad arguments, some I just don’t get, and others I haven’t read yet, has been embroiled with Citizen’s Investigative Team over their abuse of his evidence, and it seems has let his bridges to the Pilots be burnt down. He was indispensable in helping me to see and analyze the shadow south of the Citgo, although I must note all my findings are my own; that we happen to agree this does not a cabal make.

At any rate, I was excited to hear he’d be interviewed on Coast to Coast AM by host Ian Punnett on Saturday November 3. I didn’t catch it live, but a free audio version is available for a listen here: Select Sunday Nov. 4, 12:00 am; interview starts at 39:15. Requires Windows Media Player.

Punnett seems perhaps suspicious of Farmer as a former cop and oil company “numbers guy” [see site bio] and had earlier played Inner Circle’s Bad Boys in honor of the appearance. Farmer explained how he was initially a non-believer in the theories on 9/11 until hearing about Operation Northwoods a year ago got him thinking. He decided if there were an inside job element, “the Pentagon attack would have to be the one that was controlled […] because [they]’re basically attacking themselves.” Similar control over sources of data was discussed as well as the possibility of official disinformation over the attack to, as Farmer put it, “get certain groups in the Truth Movement fighting each other like cats and dogs over competing theories of what happened.” He should know, of course, after dealing with Rob and Merc and their like.

His discussion on the FDR focused on suspicious statistical trends in lateral acceleration and the issue of the missing end, its last second of data at 9:37:44 pinned down at near the Sheraton Hotel, well over a mile from the Pentagon. From what I can see this seems perfectly correct. He passed on that what seems to be as much as six seconds missing is apparently outside the range of innocent technical error and so the ending would seem deliberately altered. He offered no theory to the exact implications beyond “for some reason there’s some of the data missing.”

84 RADES Alert
Farmer was more excited however to discuss the 84 RADES radar data, compiled by the Air Force’s 84th radar evaluation squadron for the FBI just days after the attacks, that he had just received a copy of on October 5. Trying to draw attention to this new source of information, he plugged for a newly posted video by collaborator Marco Bollettino with animated radar data and NEADS audio overlaid. He lamented that the media doesn’t want to talk about it; he passed the information on it to media outlets that new 9/11 data was available, but only Coast to Coast AM responded.

He also noted that other researchers hadn’t widely looked at it yet. For my part, this new radar info is something I have not dug into yet. To see it first-hand takes special software and to even grasp what others have found takes time. I tend not to post on something unless I feel like a genius on the subject, but since that feeling is usually illusory anyway, here I’d just like to pass along that this info is being looked at and seems fascinating from what I’ve seen. Over the last moth Farmer and others have analyzed the data in detail, locating blips, tracing paths, and identifying aircraft – Langley fighters, the C-130, the E4B, Flight 77, perhaps even its fireball, all seem to appear on radar. Here is a graphic by Bollettino showing last data plot consistent with the flight path at 9:37:12 – when it dropped below radar coverage – and two later returns off the path: one north at 9:37:36, one south at 9:37:48. I’m not sure what’s up with that. Intriguing, no?
Update 11/12: Craig Ranke of CIT notes there are reasons to doubt the veracity of the officially-supplied data. Notably, its track of the C-130 cargo plane sent to inspect conflicts with the personal account of C-130 pilot Steve O’Brien. And for that matter, its paths for "Flight 77" and the suspected E4B 'white jet" conflict with existing witness accounts supporting the 'north of the Citgo' path and the down-the-river white jet, if not directly the flyover theory since that all would happen too low to see on radar.
Additional Info
84 RADES discussion forum
All blog posts on radar data
FDR/RADES comparitive study: PDF link

No comments: