I just watched that film on Netflix. As far as I am concerned, the people involved in forming the arguments for a government conspiracy are also disingenuous. They want it to be a missile. All those eyewitnesses saw a missile. Some of the data is consistent with a missile attack, according to them. Then, it’s a missile. But even the distinguished PhD that is obsessed with the possible cover-up has apparently found that the eyewitnesses contradict each other, because one missile became 3 missiles launched from three different locations. The disgruntled investigators that are off the reservation and demand more investigation seem sincere. After 4 years of less than satisfactory analysis and mind boggling resource expenditure, all they see is the data that contradicts the official explanation, while blind to the data that contradicts their own theory. OK, maybe circumstantial evidence affected the official decision. This is pretty weak, but the public demanded an official reason. It is possible they took the easy way out and said the 747 broke. A fuel fume explosion was plausible, but not provable. One thing that is much less probable is that the US military shot down this plane. Why? Because it would be impossible to hide. Three missiles fired from two land sites and a ship at sea would leave so many loose ends in the form of people involved, the secret could not be kept. I don’t know what type of missile has the performance required to be consistent with this intercept, but I don’t think little shoulder fired IR guided “stinger” types can do it. Besides, those small warheads could not do what happened to TWA 800. The makers of this documentary dance around who the capable entity would be, and why they would do an airliner shoot-down. Is it me, or are they indicting the US military for this act? Since they say the missiles came from land and sea, was cooperation between the Navy and Army implicated? They did not come out and say it, so they know how serious a charge like that is. The dissenters do not have the proof of their theory either. Mach 4 debris radar tracks? Puh-leeze. Why was the fact the same radar did not track the incoming missile better explained? They are convinced further study will get them what they need. I am telling everyone that in a case like this, more data and more “experts” will only unearth more theories. The lead dissenter, the PhD in physics guy, has no expertise in the results that come from a missile warhead detonation. I have some knowledge of those effects, limited to viewing pictures of ballistic ground tests of actual jet fuel systems. His theory that a missile detonation shattered the left wing into pieces all along the span is dumb. He made it up to connect the data that the left wing was found fragmented and there was a mist observed coming from the left wing by one of the witnesses. Both these data points can be explained by several alternate scenarios. His makeshift explosive ground test gives me no insight, but proves everything to him. I noticed that military aircraft survivability experts declined to comment for this documentary. They probably couldn’t make a definitive judgment either. Sorry for the rant, but the frailties of human beings upset me, especially my own.
<a href="http://www.northfac ejackets2014.net" >north face outlet</a>
