The Smoking Gun - Sept. 11th Plane Impact Time Discrepancies

The Smoking Gun - Sept. 11th Plane Impact Time Discrepancies


The facts are simple and few, yet extremely powerful for what they mean: US Government complicity in 9/11/01.

Facts by themselves are simple and mean something, but these facts lead to a true smoking gun. I know of no other regarding 9/11. Do you? A smoking gun that can be given in a court of law?

What is presented here is no theory. It is factual data of “impact times” from Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory at Columbia University (LDEO) that differs significantly from factual data of impact times given in the 9/11 Commission’s Final Report.

LDEO
Link: http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/LCSN/Eq/20010911_wtc.html
(note: all times precise to plus or minus 1 to 2 seconds)



9/11 Commission Timeline
Link: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/911/index.html
(note: both impact times are the only ones on the page precise to the second)



This is the data:

<“Impact Times”>
LDEO
8:46:26 and 9:02:54


9/11 Commission
8:46:40 and 9:03:11

Respective Differences
14 seconds
17 seconds

After reflecting upon these timing discrepancies and what they mean, indicting evidence appears of something very wrong with the official explanation about what happened. Lest we forget, America still owes it to those who perished on 9/11, and their families and friends, to get to the bottom of this; justice has yet to be served on those responsible.

Both impacts are important. This happened twice, and comparing LDEO versus the 9/11 Commission Report, there are similar time disparities (respective differences of 14 and 17 seconds). Consider these as extremely close to the differential, because when consideration is given to the seismic wave, amplitude, and duration, understand that the dominant period is extremely short and occurs near the beginning of the signal.

We have LDEO on record stating times of plus or minus 1 to 2 seconds, which is a high degree of precision. Would they publish if a 95% level of confidence had not been achieved for the data? No. LDEO was then (and still is) a prestigious scientific entity; and no one has challenged their data for 9/11/01. We should trust their seismic data.

Is there any expected time delay between the initiation of the "impact" pulse and the reception of the seismic signal? From study, it is understood that this factor is already accounted for in the software logic used. Besides, if this were a factor, it would make the disparity greater, thereby yielding even greater time differences; however, the differences we have already are compelling.

Two questions:
(1) Is there any motive behind having two sets of impact times?
(2) What is the significance, if any, of having two different sets of impact times?

Addressing Question (1): Motive probably had nothing to do with our now having two different sets of impact times; also, more than likely, no one lied in all this with the information each entity published. Probably the 9/11 Commission made a simple error of missed oversight. They should have noticed the disparity in impact times and looked into the matter. This is their error. They never saw the disparities, or, if they did, they never attempted to resolve them. Then, years later, somebody happened to notice them by chance. The Commission either did not care, did not bother to ask LDEO, did not consider it at all, or, more than likely, was not even aware of the Lamont-Doherty seismic data regarding “impact times”. If they had known, someone at the Commission would surely have envisioned possible future repercussions of having two sets of factual data on impact times (such as is happening now). This would be (and now is) a conflict of data from two highly reliable sources—something that is to be avoided in one’s life and affairs. Each day has enough trouble of its own.

The problem probably came about by having two different groups of people working during two different time periods. They just happened to intersect on a single data point by either accident, neglect, or whatever. Actually, it was the Commission who did the “intersecting” as LDEO was published long before the Commission came into being. LDEO did their job on 9/11 and believed at the time that their seismic data, precise to the second, represented the impacts on the towers (this is key because what they thought were “impacts” is now brought into question). Another key here is “at the time”. Think about it. LDEO had these two small seismic spikes at the general time of the impacts, so they must have naturally thought they were the impacts. This is understandable, especially in the light of that horrible day.

However, the 9/11 Commission’s precision times came much later, at a different time period, and only after much analysis and effort. They are basically based upon: "We have determined that the impact time was 9:03:11 based on our analysis of FAA radar data and air traffic control software logic." <9/11 Commission Report, pg 460, Note 130>:

http://www.insightful.com/infact/911/corpus/report_470_460.html
(Note 130 is the basis for WTC1 & WTC2 precision impact times to the second)



This is an entirely different set of data than LDEO, but it too is highly accurate and precise; e.g., consider the technology needed and used in the space program; and although different, these technologies are similar in many ways; and one critical way they are similar is that they both must be precise in the area of timing; and so they are. It is known that the FAA tracked AA Flight 11 under four different stations using Primary Radar Return, and all times were being recorded to the second.

So, this is probably how these two extremely precise but different data sets came about for the same event (plane impact) and appear before us now. However, it does not matter how they came into being. What is important is that both sets are precise to the second.

Also important is: Are the two data sets correct?

As pointed out above, the LDEO set should be correct. The 9/11 Commission’s set should be trustworthy as well. This is because both entities came up with their conclusive data under similar conditions and constraints: required, high precision parameters; working in the face of high visibility in the wake of a national tragedy; and finally, the general understanding of what these entities were attempting to do (i.e., to get it right). There is no reason to disbelieve either data set.

Addressing Question (2): What is the significance, if any, of the different impact times?
Yes, there is significance and it goes to the next level; this is the heart of the matter.

The Commission Report must have the correct impact times because this is what they were specifically looking at: flight data that ultimately ended at precise terminations (to the second) when the towers were struck. There is no question: precisely, AA Flight 77 died at 8:46:40 and UA Flight 175 at 9:03:11 . So, if the planes impacted the towers at those times, what were these earlier times as noted by LDEO due to notable seismic spikes (~14 and ~17 seconds earlier)?

What first caught my eye last week about this was the implausibility of “impact times” by LDEO. I thought, “How can such a huge jet airliner impact WTC1 above the 90th floor and we end up with energy transference traveling all the way down to the earth (even through the massive multi-level sub-basement structure) sufficiently so as to be picked up by LDEO as a seismic spike?” This still makes no sense. Energy from the impact should have been mostly absorbed by the building’s immense structure and mass.

Then I recalled reading a while back about accounts of people who experienced explosions down in the basements before the planes struck. The following is an excerpt about one of them, an eyewitness at WTC1 by the name of William Rodriguez:

http://www.newswithviews.com/Spingola/deanna17.htm

-------
Arriving at 8:30 on the morning of 9-11 he went to the maintenance office located on the first sublevel, one of six sub-basements beneath ground level. There were a total of fourteen people in the office at that same time. As he was discussing the day’s tasks with others, there was a very loud massive explosion which seemed to emanate from between sub-basement B2 and B3. There were an additional twenty-two people on B2 sub-basement who also felt and heard that first explosion.

At first he thought it was a generator that had exploded. But the cement walls in the office cracked from the explosion. “When I heard the sound of the explosion, the floor beneath my feet vibrated, the walls started cracking and everything started shaking.” said Rodriguez, who was crowded together with fourteen other people in the office including Anthony Saltamachia, his supervisor for the American Building Maintenance Company.

Just seconds later there was another explosion way above which made the building oscillate momentarily. This, he was later told, was a plane hitting the tower at about the 90th floor. Upon hearing about the plane, he immediately thought of the people up in the restaurant. Then there were other explosions just above B1 and individuals started heading for the loading dock to escape the explosion’s resulting rampant fire. When asked later about those first explosions he said: “I would know if an explosion was from the bottom or the top of the building.” He heard explosions both before and after the plane hit the tower.
-------

This provides the plausible answer as to what LDEO picked up as a seismic spike moments before the plane struck the tower.

Again, the question: What caused the earlier seismic spike picked up by LDEO?

There are only two logical choices: either (A) a true seismic event (a very small earthquake tremor; and, yes, this would mean the eyewitnesses who said explosions happened before the plane struck are not telling the truth), or (B) very large explosion(s).

It could not possibly have been a very small earthquake. Why? Because this same, exact scenario happened again a few minutes later at WTC2, both spikes occurring within a brief 15-minute period under the most unusual circumstances. The odds of this happening by chance go beyond the pale, beyond the realms of possibility (you don’t need to be a statistician to see this). This only happens when man is involved.

The earlier seismic spikes had to have been (B): very large explosion(s). Middle Eastern terrorists could not possibly have been responsible; they do not have the wherewithal for this kind of scale.

It is more than remarkable that the 9/11 Commission, although it did hear the testimony of William Rodriguez regarding the explosions in the basements, did not deem this important enough to be included in their Final Report.

It should have been.

This is what really happened:

Explosion(s) Meant to Coincide……………
<“Impact Times”>
LDEO
8:46:26 and 9:02:54

Respective Differences
14 seconds
17 seconds

With

……………Planes Impacting Towers

9/11 Commission
8:46:40 and 9:03:11

(The explosions were more than likely done to prepare the buildings for final controlled demolition later by implosion.)

To sum up: This is no conspiracy theory. Why?
This is not theory. These are facts.

But it is definitely a conspiracy.

This isn’t rocket science (it is simple).
This is the smoking gun (it is solid evidence).
It has legs (knowledge of this is now spreading).
And this dog can hunt.

What must be done? Two extremely important things:

(1) A new independent, quasi-private-public, non-politicized 9/11 investigation must be formed at once to approach and pursue this for what it really is: the crime of the century. America needs good police detective work here—and the conspirators need to be identified, apprehended, jailed, and brought to justice…now.

(2) The 9/11 Commission and the Bush Administration must answer this question immediately:

WHAT CAUSED THOSE SEISMIC SPIKES?

They must answer, they must answer now—and if they don’t, it is the same as admitting guilt.

The entire US Government is not bad; just the few rogue conspirators who did 9/11—those who committed mass murder, treason, and betrayal to America.

May God help us.
Craig T. Furlong
Huntington Beach, CA USA
July 31, 2006

PS IMPORTANT—ASAP, please send this message far and wide!

130."N90 controller stated 'at approximately 9:00 a.m., I observed an unknown aircraft south of the Newark, New Jersey Airport, northeast bound and descending out of twelve thousand nine hundred feet in a rapid rate of descent, the radar target terminated at the World Trade Center.'" FAA report,"Summary of Air Traffic Hijack Events September 11, 2001,"Sept. 17, 2001. Former NORAD official Alan Scott testified that the time of impact of United 175 was 9:02. William Scott testimony, May 23, 2003. We have determined that the impact time was 9:03:11 based on our analysis of FAA radar data and air traffic control software logic.

http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Notes.htm

The earlier seismic spikes had to have been (B): very large explosion(s).

Terry Wallace verified their calculations. He said he examined all four crashes and only the Pentagon didn't register as a seismic event. I'm sure if he thought the LDEO paper's times were wrong he would have mentioned something about it.

The seismic energy of a M_L 0.7 to 0.9 computed for the impacts is a tiny fraction of the kinetic energy of each aircraft, about 2 x 10⁹ J.

http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/LCSN/Eq/20010911_WTC/WTC_LDEO_KIM.pdf

You seem to believe that well known and well respected seismologists lie about or make mistakes with their published margins of error. What evidence can you provide for this contention?

First, you know and I know that the reason both Wallace & Kim said the impact caused the seismic record is because they never considered any other possibility.

You know and I know that a basement explosion would be a more likely explanation.

.. what I've been told about 9/11 from official sources is full of crap and full of holes ..

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=101457&mesg_id=101523

Why investigate 9/11 indeed? When you consider how well the 9/11 Commission answered all the victims' families' questions ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=104591&mesg_id=104664

"500 mph is 733 feet per second.

So how could the best estimates be more than two seconds off?"

"For 14 or 17 seconds, we are talking about the 9/11 Commission being off by 2 to 3 miles.

2 to 3 miles. Just consider that for a second. How could air traffic even work of these sorts of errors were possible?"

"So you guys make errors of over 2 miles all the time, right?

What's 2 or 3 miles between friends when it somes to estimating "stuff" about airplanes?

Because that's how far a plane going 500 to 550 mph travels in 14 to 17 seconds."

"So the Commission looked at all the available NYC ATC evidence and still made TWO DISTINCT errors, one of about 3 miles and one of about 2 miles concerning where the planes were actually located at the times they said they were impacting the towers?

That's what you think happened?"

"Without assuming a TWO MILE and a THREE MILE error on the part of the 9/11 Commission in terms of where they located the planes, the OP's claims stand.

Just imagine, you are saying that you believe that our best NYC ATC estimates concluded that two planes crashed 12-19 seconds (1.7 to 2.6 miles) before they actually crashed."

"...what could possibly have made the 9/11 Commission believe that the planes were still in the air more than 9 seconds (during which time a plane going 500 mph would travel 1.25 miles) after both the seismic evidence and NIST's video evidence (whatever it is, which NIST never explains) say the planes hit the towers?

If air traffic control measurements are this imprecise, why aren't planes crashing into each other ever day? Of course, they answer is that they aren't. So what could possibly account for this discrepancy?"

We have LDEO on record stating times of plus or minus 1 to 2 seconds, which is a high degree of precision. Would they publish if a 95% level of confidence had not been achieved for the data? No. LDEO was then (and still is) a prestigious scientific entity; and no one has challenged their data for 9/11/01. We should trust their seismic data.

However, the 9/11 Commission’s precision times came much later, at a different time period, and only after much analysis and effort. They are basically based upon: "We have determined that the impact time was 9:03:11 based on our analysis of FAA radar data and air traffic control software logic." <9/11 Commission Report, pg 460, Note 130>

  <- snip ->

This is an entirely different set of data than LDEO, but it too is highly accurate and precise; e.g., consider the technology needed and used in the space program; and although different, these technologies are similar in many ways; and one critical way they are similar is that they both must be precise in the area of timing; and so they are. It is known that the FAA tracked AA Flight 11 under four different stations using Primary Radar Return, and all times were being recorded to the second.

Also important is: Are the two data sets correct?

As pointed out above, the LDEO set should be correct. The 9/11 Commission’s set should be trustworthy as well. This is because both entities came up with their conclusive data under similar conditions and constraints: required, high precision parameters; working in the face of high visibility in the wake of a national tragedy; and finally, the general understanding of what these entities were attempting to do (i.e., to get it right). There is no reason to disbelieve either data set.

Shifting the burden of proof

The burden of proof is always on the person asserting something. Shifting the burden of proof, a special case of Argumentum ad Ignorantiam, is the fallacy of putting the burden of proof on the person who denies or questions the assertion. The source of the fallacy is the assumption that something is true unless proven otherwise.

For further discussion of this idea, see the "Introduction to Atheism" document.

"OK, so if you don't think the grey aliens have gained control of the US government, can you prove it?"

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/mathew/logic.html#shifting

At 8:46:40, American 11 crashed into the North Tower of the World Trade Center in New York City.³⁹

  <- snip ->

At 9:03:11, United Airlines Flight 175 struck the South Tower of the World Trade Center.⁵¹

http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch1.htm


NOTES:

39. NTSB report, "Flight Path Study-American Airlines Flight 11," Feb. 19, 2002.

51. NTSB report, "Flight Path Study-United Airlines 175," Feb. 19, 2002.

130."N90 controller stated 'at approximately 9:00 a.m., I observed an unknown aircraft south of the Newark, New Jersey Airport, northeast bound and descending out of twelve thousand nine hundred feet in a rapid rate of descent, the radar target terminated at the World Trade Center.'" FAA report,"Summary of Air Traffic Hijack Events September 11, 2001,"Sept. 17, 2001. Former NORAD official Alan Scott testified that the time of impact of United 175 was 9:02. William Scott testimony, May 23, 2003. We have determined that the impact time was 9:03:11 based on our analysis of FAA radar data and air traffic control software logic.

http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Notes.htm

It would be very interesting to see the NTSB reports cited by the 9/11 Commission. Wouldn't you agree? Why of all the NTSB reports ever released have these and these alone been treated as classified information? Can you possibly think of a reason for this -- other than incompetence, of course?

It would be useful if collapse events evident in videos could be associated with seismic signal features. Since some news broadcasts have real-time clocks on their banners, it may be possible to match visual events with features of the seismic signals.

Consider the North Tower, whose entire collapse was recorded by the above-mentioned CNN live feed, which has a clock on its banner. That clock does not have a second counter, but its minute counter flips to 10:29 37 seconds after collapse starts, which places the collapse start, according to the CNN clock, at 10:28:23.

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/collapses/freefall.html

The 9/11 Commission Final Report stated the impact time for UA Flt 175 was 9:03:11, while NIST used LDEO's time of 9:02:54 and took all of the time stamps for all of the evidence and, using the 9:02:54 as the standard, the average came out to be: 9:02:59. They then reported this time of 9:02:59 as: ADJUSTED TIMES FROM TELEVISION STATIONS

MY POINT HERE IS YOU DO NOT WANT TO USE TELEVISION TIME STAMPS AS THEY ARE ALL DIFFERENT

Based on four independent video recordings, the actual time of the second aircraft impact was determined to be 9:02:59 a.m., or 5 s later than the time assigned in developing the database.

pdf p.50-51

(dial-up warning - do not attempt to open the following file.)
http://wtc.nist.gov/NISTNCSTAR1-5A_chap_1-8.pdf

         Table E-1.   Times for Major Events of September 11, 2001.
                            Relative Time from   Adjusted Time from   
            Event            Visual Analysis    Television Broadcasts 
    First aircraft impact      8:46:25 a.m.         8:46:30 a.m.      
    Second aircraft impact     9:02:54 a.m.         9:02:59 a.m.      
    Collapse of WTC 2          9:58:54 a.m.         9:58:59 a.m.      
    Collapse of WTC 1         10:28:17 a.m.        10:28:22 a.m.      
    Collapse of WTC 7          5:20:47 p.m.         5:20:52 p.m.      

This chapter describes the fire behaviors observed in World Trade Center (WTC) 2 during the period following the impact of United Airlines Flight 175 at 9:02:59 a.m. until the tower collapsed at 9:58:59 a.m.

(pdf page 1)

WARNING to dial-up users: You should probably avoid opening this one too.
http://wtc.nist.gov/NISTNCSTAR1-5A_chap_9-AppxC.pdf

Figure 9-1 shows an image of the east face of WTC 2 recorded at 9:03:42 a.m., which was 43 s after the aircraft impact.

(pdf page 1)

WARNING to dial-up users: You should probably avoid opening this one too.
http://wtc.nist.gov/NISTNCSTAR1-5A_chap_9-AppxC.pdf

A view of the south face of WTC 2 recorded at 9:04:36 a.m. is shown in Figure 9-4. It was taken 97 s after the aircraft impact on this face.

(pdf page 3)

WARNING to dial-up users: You should probably avoid opening this one too.
http://wtc.nist.gov/NISTNCSTAR1-5A_chap_9-AppxC.pdf

The times are accurate.

THERE IT IS, MAKE7 AND ALL YOU OTHER SHILLS: I know you can read. It is the last sentence..."Due to the large number of different views available, the moment when the nose of the second aircraft struck the south face of WTC 2 was chosen as the reference time."