Is it valid data?

 

Well the data could not be valid from an earlier flight as the NTSB has maintained. That leaves the data as an artifact recorded as the aircraft was breaking up following a center fuel tank explosion, or the data accurately is recording a shock wave from an explosion in front of the aircraft immediately before breakup.

 

After reading all 15 pages, it is scary that some of you are airline pilots holding an ATP certificate.

 

It's scary that you bothered to read all 15 pages!

 

The original investigation was carried out in an environment where the White House was screaming that there was no missile and Kalstrom at the FBI was running around like a bull moose screaming that there was no missile yet there is this last line of flight recorder data, as yet unexplained, that possibly says ".....oh s&*t!".

 

I can't believe that you can't believe the unbelievable. I have a pal who worked on 747s at United and I asked him what he thought of the whole TWA 800 fiasco, his answer wouldn't please the government towing NTSB crowd. If there is one thing I have learned about government investigations, they always lend credence to the witness who support the government theory, all the others are either mistaken or kooks.

 

And now the paranoia sets in.

 

I'm not sure you understand the implications of this phrase.

"that possibly" has been used in your mind as evidence that something specifically happened or didn't happen, but the phrase you used implies there is no corroborating evidence and it remains either an anomaly, invalid data, or false interpretation. The investigation ran through all kinds of simulation and trajectory analysis to prove that the fuel-tank explosion would cause the front of the airplane to fall to the ground where it did, while the fuselage and wing would continue along the path that it did, for as long as it did, all due to the internal combustion of the fuselage tank, and it's not like empty fuel tank explosion causing catastrophic failure is unprecedented, yet that's one of the things that conspiracy theory nuts scream over and over. A quick search shows this has been the cause of multiple boeing crashes. As we've seen just recently, shrapnel and the patterns it creates would be relatively easy to detect if it was a missile, so this conspiracy theory stuff just makes people that claim "it was a missile" look ridiculous.

John explained earlier why people "want to believe". I work with the NTSB on investigations and I can assure you there is no "vast coverup" going on. Of course, it shouldn't be my assurance, it should be the preponderance of evidence that convinces you, but it can be more emotionally satisfying to think "it was a missile". It's the easy way out sometimes.

 

If…then. If Jack wasn’t killed by a crazed sharp shooter who got lucky, if TW800 didn’t fall victim to a fuel vapor explosion as alleged; then eye popping, jaw dropping, prima facie evidence for any alternative explanation sits squarely on the shoulders of the claimant. As always, IMVHO.

 

Yes. Alas, it is much more amusing to some to theorize that the good old NCC 1701 was employed by NASA to use its phaser weapon to down a rogue 747 over the Atlantic.

Next: Queue the conspiracy kids that also tout that Rampage shootings are mind-control experiments by the U.S. govt. It goes on and on and on….