Re: Waco Test Shows "OBVIOUS GUNFIRE"

From: Joe Dees (joedees@addall.com)
Date: Mon Mar 20 2000 - 19:38:06 MST

('binary' encoding is not supported, stored as-is) >Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 20:42:36 -0500
>To: extropians@extropy.com
>From: Ian Goddard <Ian@Goddard.net>
>Subject: Re: Waco Test Shows "OBVIOUS GUNFIRE"
>Reply-To: extropians@extropy.com
>
>At 11:27 AM 03/20/2000 -0800, Joe Dees wrote:
>
>>The test actually works AGAINST the agent-firing hypothesis, as in the
>FLIR recreation, people are visible next to all the fired weapons, whereas
>in the original FLIR, no contiguous people are visible. Guns do not kill
>people unless other people are firing them, and such people being visible
>in EVERY instance of the "recreational" gunfire, but in NO instance of the
>original glints, the test results do not bode well for the contentions of
>the Branch Davidians' attorney that such glints represent gunfire.
>
>
> IAN: Where does it say shooters were "visible in
> EVERY instance"? But actually, they should be for
> the reason Mike Lorrey stated. I was sure to check
> the high temperature yesterday in Waco for just that
> reason, and it was 69 degrees. However, it was in the
> mid 80s on April 19, 1993. There's a very big difference
> here. A person laying in a sun-drenched field most likely
> wearing heavy camouflage gear with air temps in the 80s is
> probably not going to be much warmer than the ground, and
> their clothing will probably be the same temperature as
> the ground. To a FLIR camera, this temperature identity
> means that the person on the ground will be invisible.
>
Refer to my other discussion of the CNN segment, which obviates this claim.
>
> However, as McNulty's latest video shows, two gunmen
> CAN be seen with muzzle flashes occurring exactly in
> front of them, and these gunmen just exited a tank,
> unlike the gunmen inherently in the other positions.
> These gunmen can be seen as black, human-shaped objects
> since their clothing is cooler than the ground because
> they just exited the air-conditioned tank. The fact
> is if you see these flashes of light, they're quite
> obviously gun shots, they flash a rates equal to a
> machine gun and you can see their pear shape, ie, they
> are wide at the muzzle end and taper in the direction
> the gun is being fired. As the fire starts, you can also
> see embers flashing as they blow in the wind. There is
> an unmistakable difference between the gun flashes
> and the flashes of embers blowing away from the fire.
>
You have much emotional investment in your oft-expressed position on this issue, as anyone who has been onlist for the past couple of years can readily attest. Could it be that your preconceptions are dictating your perceptions?
>
> You never see any glints of light in the large fields
> of building debris, nor do you ever see reflections of
> the sun in the pool of water from the many angles of
> view as the plane circles above, but you do see the
> reflection of the sun in the same pool with a visible-
> radiation video taken overhead. I have the whole FLIR
> tape (not just the segments shown in McNulty's videos)
> and have watched them extensively. I'll bet that there
> is a reason they wanted these tests secret. Amazing
> how CNN is spinning this toward the favor of the FBI
> (of course): http://cnn.com/2000/US/03/20/waco/index.html
>
Yeah, the conspiracy grows: now it's that commie CNN, the creation of that arch-villain Ted Turncoat, fornicator of Hanoi Jane, that is spinning this in the fascist jackbooted thug direction. Self-contradictory piffle! Objectivity is not something that anyone on this list can reasonably expect from you on this issue, Ian. Your entire study of it has been for the express purpose of advocating your preinvested position.
>
> =======================================================
> Roger Williams --> http://www.Ian.Goddard.net/roger.htm
> =======================================================

------------------------------------------------------------
Looking for a book? Want a deal? No problem AddALL!
http://www.addall.com compares book price at 41 online stores.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:27:33 MST