Originally Posted by
mike734
I believe it was a missile. I've spoken to several people with first hand accounts of the incident. Why is it so hard to believe the Navy could have made a mistake? The notion that you can't keep people quiet is ridiculous. All you have to do is shout down a few loudmouths and the rest keep quiet. Besides, how many sailors are in a position to know exactly what is being shot at and the when's and where's of live fire exercises? Anyway, people are not keeping quiet. That's what this movie documents. There are hundreds of witnesses including a P3 crew that saw a missile.
- The Navy doesn't conduct missile exercises anywhere near long Island.
- Anybody who's served on a ship can tell you that EVERYONE on the ship knows when a missile is fired. It's a very rare event and everybody would talk about it, especially the next day when they saw the news about TWA 800. Don't believe me? Ask any Navy guy, I assume you fly with some.
- What P-3 crew? Maybe I know them.
Originally Posted by
mike734
A NY center controller who, after the plane went down, reviewed the tapes of the raw radar scans when the plane went down. She says she can make out a radar return streaking toward TWA 800. At the time those returns were explained away as spurious electronic noise.
Why would anybody think for an instant that a radar could experience spurious noise? That's incredibly rare. On the other hand the skies over America are filled with thousands of missiles at any given moment, much more likely she saw a missile.
Originally Posted by
mike734
A former Federal covert agent that told me about how a fisherman brought up an expended rocket motor, turned to in and was told thank you. He never heard anything more about it. Neither have you.
Well there you have it folks! Third hand info from the "Federal Covert Agency". They're the ones in the X-files, right? That's hands-down conclusive.
Originally Posted by
mike734
Other evidence not fully explained is the seat fabric that had solid rocket fuel residue on it.
Is that in the report? There are a variety of chemicals which are similar to organic explosives and fuels and false positives are common. An EOD tech who handles HE and then goes from work directly to the airport will leave a trail of false positives throughout the system.
Originally Posted by
mike734
So why didn't we cover THAT one up? We might even have gotten away that one since the arabs/persians blame us for everything anyway.
Originally Posted by
mike734
Other things to consider. The fuel air mixture in a fuel tank is far too rich to support combustion. It's only after the tank breaks apart and the fuel is atomized that there is a fireball.
How do you know that? Now you're talking about things beyond your level of education. Fuel can explode when vaporized (ie becomes a gas) and is mixed with air (the O2 part) at the proper ratio. "Atomizing" fuel mechanically approximates vaporized fuel and enhances vaporization, it can described with calculus. The root cause of TWA 800 was a nearly empty tank with a lot of air and a heat source which caused enough residual fuel to vaporize to achieve the right ratio, plus the electrical fault to ignite it. That ratio is a narrow range, which is why 747's probably aren't falling out of the sky regularly.
They found the center tank, it clearly exploded from the inside
If you really believe all that you should consider shredding your medical and seeking professional help. I expect this kind of thinking from the loser IT guy who works in a cubicle, surfs conspiracy sites all day, and smokes weed all night. But not a from a 737 CA.