Offline Gonzo

  • *
  • Posts: 52
    • View Profile
Re: The Bipolar Model- An Investigation.
« Reply #40 on: March 21, 2022, 01:06:30 PM »
There have been a few claims in this thread regarding flight tracking/ADS-B and in-flight diversions. Thought I’d collect some thoughts.

First, a short intro.

I’ve been an air traffic controller at London Heathrow for 23 years, In the last 14 years I’ve been working in our Operations department. As part of that I’ve worked on developing and introducing operational ATC ADS-B systems (including comparing accuracy to ATC radar data), analysed and worked with commercial flight trackers (one of my duties is to help respond to noise complaints and queries from local residents using FR24 etc)

A few notes on Flight trackers.

FR24 and other commercial trackers use various methods of determining position.

ADS-B – this is where the aircraft is effectively continually broadcasting a message, and part of that message is its own location.
    - Note that in some cases, particularly older aircraft, this ‘own location’ may not be derived from GNSS signals, and may even be determined by what we call DME/DME triangulation (DME – Distance Measuring Equipment – a ground-based radio beacon, often co-located with a VOR navigation aid).
    - You only need one antenna/receiver to pick up these signals and plot locations. You can buy these for less than $100 and FR24 and others will send you one for free if you then connect up and feed their network.
    - Some flight trackers have a commercial agreement with satellite-based ADS-B providers that feed ATC systems for over the ocean flying, away from ground-based ATC radar cover.

Some aircraft aren’t fitted with ADS-B, or can turn ADS-B broadcasts off. In this case, the aircraft’s transponder (sometimes called SSR – Secondary Surveillance Radar) will be used. This is the aircraft sending out signals in response to a pulse from a ground-based ATC radar. This response from the transponder does not include the aircraft’s position, but ATC radar will merge the information received with the Primary radar (energy being reflected back from the aircraft received at the same time as the transponder response) to provide location on ATC radar screens. Flight tracking apps (with one exception – I’ll come to later) don’t have access to this, so they use a multilateration system. Mode S transponder receivers again are pretty cheap to buy (or provided free as above), and FR24 et al use triangulation to provide position data on non-ADS-B aircraft.

The exception that I know if is an iPad-only app called ‘NATS Airspace Explorer’ which is a flight tracking app provided by NATS, the main ATC provider in the UK. It takes a feed from the actual ATC radar system (anywhere in UK airspace above about 1000ft apart from over mountains) rather than ADS-B. It’s what controllers are seeing on their screen in real time.

There are some aircraft that won’t show up on FR24 et al even if they are broadcasting ADS-B. Aircraft owners can apply to be on a list of suppressed aircraft, this is mainly done for commercial or security/govt. sensitivity reasons.

However, the website-based tracker ADSBExchange.com does not use any filtering. It’s a crowdsourced organization and those suppressed aircraft will show up if they are using ADS-B.

Accuracy of ADS-B.

As I said earlier, ADS-B information is now being used operationally in many countries, especially in the USA. I think now around 150 US airports use ADS-B info overlaid on their radar screens, and, as the ONLY source of position information over the world’s oceans out of ATC radar cover. Bearing in mind that you or I could buy an ADS-B receiver to feed flight trackers I’m not sure on what basis any government organisation could ‘interfere’ with that data

In-flight diversions

There was a comment earlier on the thread:
“Aeronautics credentials are not required to connect three points on a map.”

In-flight diversions are a lot more complex than just diverting to the ‘nearest airport’, as some (including the author of that ‘book’) seem to think.

Most international airlines use a service based in Phoenix, AZ called MedLink MedAire. This is a 24/7 operation staffed by ER doctors which is the first port of call for aircraft in the air when there’s a sick passenger.
They will advise the airline on the best course of action.
Factors that need to be considered in choosing a diversion airport:
•   If it’s a medical diversion, is the patient stable? Is it every second counts?
•   Medical care facilities at the airport, and wider area
•   Runway length, runway strength, taxiway strength, anticipated aircraft landing weight
•   Weather now and forecast
•   Air traffic control provision
•   Airport fire fighting and rescue cover
•   Fuel and aircraft servicing provision (hydraulic fuel, lubricants, steps to reach the aircraft, baggage facilities, towing capability)
•   Does the airline have contracts in place with companies at the proposed diversion airport?
•   Engineer/mechanic provision
•   Flight crew duty hours
•   Relief crew position
•   Passenger services (immigration/customs)
•   Accommodation for crew and passengers
•   Distance from aircraft (to be comfortable for passengers, most airliners require about 10nm for every 3000ft of altitude. The descent rate could be increased somewhat if it was an emergency, but you’re still talking nearly 100nm from 35,000ft).
•   Passengers on board (do they need visas to land at proposed diversion? Will they be kept on board for hours while the situation is sorted out?).
•   Are there vulnerable passengers on board (i.e. people whom one country would be very keen to get their hands on? (for example the relatively recent incident over Belarus)) .
•   Political concerns (i.e. A US flight might go another 20-30nm to avoid diverting to Iran and making it to UAE).
These are factors I have just come up with, and no doubt there are many more to be considered.

To second guess why a crew made a decision to divert to a particular airport with no knowledge of most of these factors (as the 'book' does) is naive in the extreme.

Happy to answer any questions on the above, if I can!
« Last Edit: March 22, 2022, 06:17:44 AM by Gonzo »

Offline Action80

  • *
  • Posts: 2024
    • View Profile
Re: The Bipolar Model- An Investigation.
« Reply #41 on: March 21, 2022, 02:10:48 PM »
Happy to answer any questions on the above, if I can!
What do you mean to communicate here:

"Bearing in mind that you or I could buy an ADS-B receiver to feed flight trackers I’m not sure on what basis any government organisation could ‘interfere’ with that data"
It's so hard to have faith in humanity when they do shit like this.

"I hate the police so I'm gonna burn a Walgreen's!"

Offline Gonzo

  • *
  • Posts: 52
    • View Profile
Re: The Bipolar Model- An Investigation.
« Reply #42 on: March 21, 2022, 02:28:21 PM »
Happy to answer any questions on the above, if I can!
What do you mean to communicate here:

"Bearing in mind that you or I could buy an ADS-B receiver to feed flight trackers I’m not sure on what basis any government organisation could ‘interfere’ with that data"

I apologise, I thought it was pretty clear.

ADS-B receivers are abvailable to purchase, or receive free of charge in association with one of the many flight tracker wensites out there.

If you are really paranoid, you can plug them into your computer to build your own flight tracker (with limited horizon of around 100-150 miles). you receive the aircraft's transmissions and that shows you on your computer the location of the aircraft. You don't even need an internet connection. What opportunity are you seeing for anyone to interfere with the data in this case?

A large part of my job is verifying ADS-B data for accuracy (we compare it to ATC radar data to safety assure its use to provide separation between aircraft). If there were major issues with ADS-B accuracy it wouldn't be used.

(edit to remove an errant apostrophe)
« Last Edit: March 21, 2022, 05:52:12 PM by Gonzo »

Re: The Bipolar Model- An Investigation.
« Reply #43 on: March 21, 2022, 04:48:20 PM »
Happy to answer any questions on the above, if I can!
What do you mean to communicate here:

"Bearing in mind that you or I could buy an ADS-B receiver to feed flight trackers I’m not sure on what basis any government organisation could ‘interfere’ with that data"

I apologise, I thought it was pretty clear.

ADS-B receivers are abvailable to purchase, or receive free of charge in association with one of the many flight tracker wensites out there.

If you are really paranoid, you can plug them into your computer to build your own flight tracker (with limited horizon of around 100-150 miles). you receive the aircraft's transmissions and that shows you on your computer the location of the aircraft. You don't even need an internet connection. What opportunity are you seeing for anyone to interfere with the data in this case?

A large part of my job is verifying ADS-B data for accuracy (we compare it to ATC radar data to safety assure it's use to provide separation between aircraft). If there were major issues with ADS-B accuracy it wouldn't be used.
Which can be easily done with a £20 SDR receiver and some bent bits of wire for an aerial.  And some open source software.

The accuracy of ADS-B can be seen by comparing eg. FR24 with real time departure and arrival boards for airports.  Also by just seeing aircraft flying over and looking at eg. FR24 or a home based receiver to compare.

Those who doubt the accuracy of ADS data and flight routes should provide some evidence.  There is only one accepted model of the Earth - WGS84. 
« Last Edit: March 21, 2022, 06:06:26 PM by inquisitive »

Offline Action80

  • *
  • Posts: 2024
    • View Profile
Re: The Bipolar Model- An Investigation.
« Reply #44 on: March 24, 2022, 10:17:14 AM »
Happy to answer any questions on the above, if I can!
What do you mean to communicate here:

"Bearing in mind that you or I could buy an ADS-B receiver to feed flight trackers I’m not sure on what basis any government organisation could ‘interfere’ with that data"

I apologise, I thought it was pretty clear.

ADS-B receivers are abvailable to purchase, or receive free of charge in association with one of the many flight tracker wensites out there.

If you are really paranoid, you can plug them into your computer to build your own flight tracker (with limited horizon of around 100-150 miles). you receive the aircraft's transmissions and that shows you on your computer the location of the aircraft. You don't even need an internet connection. What opportunity are you seeing for anyone to interfere with the data in this case?

A large part of my job is verifying ADS-B data for accuracy (we compare it to ATC radar data to safety assure its use to provide separation between aircraft). If there were major issues with ADS-B accuracy it wouldn't be used.

(edit to remove an errant apostrophe)
So, the fact I can buy my own equipment means "the gubment," cannot or would not interfere with its operation?
It's so hard to have faith in humanity when they do shit like this.

"I hate the police so I'm gonna burn a Walgreen's!"

Offline SteelyBob

  • *
  • Posts: 756
    • View Profile
Re: The Bipolar Model- An Investigation.
« Reply #45 on: March 24, 2022, 12:12:35 PM »
So, the fact I can buy my own equipment means "the gubment," cannot or would not interfere with its operation?
If anybody tried to interfere with ADS-B out signals, it would be abundantly obvious that they had done so.

At the professional level, any air or ground system that tracks aircraft would immediately spot the mismatch between radar and ADS signals.

For amateurs, if you’re watching traffic at your local airfield, for example, and it’s not where it says on your screen, then again, it would be very obvious there’s a problem.

Furthermore, it would be enormously difficult, if not impossible, to fake the flight path of a real aircraft. If you tinker with the actual aircraft, then ATC would spot the mismatch straight away. Moreover, the aircraft would be deviating from its filed flight plan, which is a major problem. If you didn’t do that, and just tried to broadcast the fake signal to ground stations, then you’d have to make sure you successfully jammed all of the receiving ground stations, whilst all the time making sure the footprint of the broadcast matched the rough broadcast range of the actual aircraft.

And you’d have to do that all the time, for every flight whose ‘true’ flight path you wished to mask. That’s a monumental task. You’d need an army of people to do that, none of whom would be allowed to talk about it.

Offline Gonzo

  • *
  • Posts: 52
    • View Profile
Re: The Bipolar Model- An Investigation.
« Reply #46 on: March 24, 2022, 12:42:33 PM »
Correct.

It's literally part of my job to verify ADS-B data, and investigate mismatches between that and ATC radar-derived position data.

We rely on ADS-B data over the ocean to ensure aircraft maintain the required separation. There would be TCAS alerts going off all over the place if aircraft weren't where their ADS-B position claimed them to be on the scale you suggest.

And again, you can buy your own receiver and verify this yourself. Get a friend to do the same and you could even triangulate the broadcasts yourself to provide another level of verification. Can you explain how you think a government could interfere with this.

Action80, many airlines and engine manufacturers track their own aircraft/engines as they fly, often through technologies other than ADS-B. Do you think they have the correct position or is that being interfered with too? Do you think flight crews know their true position? I'm trying to understand what you're claiming here. What makes you think this interference going on? Genuine question.

Offline Action80

  • *
  • Posts: 2024
    • View Profile
Re: The Bipolar Model- An Investigation.
« Reply #47 on: March 24, 2022, 02:53:40 PM »
So, the fact I can buy my own equipment means "the gubment," cannot or would not interfere with its operation?
If anybody tried to interfere with ADS-B out signals, it would be abundantly obvious that they had done so.

At the professional level, any air or ground system that tracks aircraft would immediately spot the mismatch between radar and ADS signals.

For amateurs, if you’re watching traffic at your local airfield, for example, and it’s not where it says on your screen, then again, it would be very obvious there’s a problem.

Furthermore, it would be enormously difficult, if not impossible, to fake the flight path of a real aircraft. If you tinker with the actual aircraft, then ATC would spot the mismatch straight away. Moreover, the aircraft would be deviating from its filed flight plan, which is a major problem. If you didn’t do that, and just tried to broadcast the fake signal to ground stations, then you’d have to make sure you successfully jammed all of the receiving ground stations, whilst all the time making sure the footprint of the broadcast matched the rough broadcast range of the actual aircraft.

And you’d have to do that all the time, for every flight whose ‘true’ flight path you wished to mask. That’s a monumental task. You’d need an army of people to do that, none of whom would be allowed to talk about it.
Oh, yes, I am sure all the statements you make are absolutely necessary to support the concept, but other than you typing them out feverishly here on this forum in your daily, for pay capacity, what evidence do you have that it would be a "monumental task, requiring an army..."

None.

You are blowing smoke.

Gubment interferes with all kinds of data, all the goddamn time.

I have no idea who you're trying to zoom with this pablum you are typing out, but it ain't working.

They do not even bother posting fake real time data of FR24 for these supposed AU to SA flights, so the claim gubment cannot fake any of it, or even all of it, at the exact same time, is just nonsense.
It's so hard to have faith in humanity when they do shit like this.

"I hate the police so I'm gonna burn a Walgreen's!"

Offline Action80

  • *
  • Posts: 2024
    • View Profile
Re: The Bipolar Model- An Investigation.
« Reply #48 on: March 24, 2022, 02:55:16 PM »
Correct.

It's literally part of my job to verify ADS-B data, and investigate mismatches between that and ATC radar-derived position data.

We rely on ADS-B data over the ocean to ensure aircraft maintain the required separation. There would be TCAS alerts going off all over the place if aircraft weren't where their ADS-B position claimed them to be on the scale you suggest.

And again, you can buy your own receiver and verify this yourself. Get a friend to do the same and you could even triangulate the broadcasts yourself to provide another level of verification. Can you explain how you think a government could interfere with this.

Action80, many airlines and engine manufacturers track their own aircraft/engines as they fly, often through technologies other than ADS-B. Do you think they have the correct position or is that being interfered with too? Do you think flight crews know their true position? I'm trying to understand what you're claiming here. What makes you think this interference going on? Genuine question.
I am not making a claim interference is going on.

You made the claim interference could not go on.

I say that claim is ridiculous.
It's so hard to have faith in humanity when they do shit like this.

"I hate the police so I'm gonna burn a Walgreen's!"

Offline Gonzo

  • *
  • Posts: 52
    • View Profile
Re: The Bipolar Model- An Investigation.
« Reply #49 on: March 24, 2022, 04:03:39 PM »
Buy your own equipment, or get it for free, and verify ADS-B for yourself. Anyone can do it. Simple.


Offline SteelyBob

  • *
  • Posts: 756
    • View Profile
Re: The Bipolar Model- An Investigation.
« Reply #50 on: March 24, 2022, 05:36:49 PM »
Oh, yes, I am sure all the statements you make are absolutely necessary to support the concept, but other than you typing them out feverishly here on this forum in your daily, for pay capacity, what evidence do you have that it would be a "monumental task, requiring an army..."

None.

You are blowing smoke.

Gubment interferes with all kinds of data, all the goddamn time.

I have no idea who you're trying to zoom with this pablum you are typing out, but it ain't working.

They do not even bother posting fake real time data of FR24 for these supposed AU to SA flights, so the claim gubment cannot fake any of it, or even all of it, at the exact same time, is just nonsense.

I'm deeply flattered that you're accusing me of being a shill.

I'm not 100% clear what you mean by your last sentence there, but I think you're saying that, because there isn't complete data for oversea flights, the government is therefore capable of faking all the flights? Is that right? Because it makes no sense whatsoever. There's a very good reason why there isn't global coverage for FR24, and it's because the data goes direct from the aircraft to the ground stations, and hence has a limited range (I'll let you ponder why that may be...hint: it depends on the altitude of the aircraft), so if there aren't any ground stations, you won't get coverage. You can try to bake that into your conspiracy all you like, but it's an easily verifiable fact. Just buy your own gear and have a play. It's super simple - just a TV aerial and a usb stick, and you can just watch the raw data if you're really keen, or run it through some software, like FR24's, and watch it all on a map.

You've asked 'what evidence' for the number of people required to do the fakery. Well, I don't think 'evidence' is the right word, as I'm being asked to prove something that isn't happening, but I can certainly expand a bit on the reason, if you are indeed genuinely interested. It comes down to how much effort is required really. Lets' see:

- first up, let's make some assumptions. So the world is flat, and for reasons unknown, all the governments of the world are conspiring to suppress the information, and one way of doing that is to pretend that, instead of the direct FE route for all passenger flights, aircraft are actually following a RE track, based on the fake RE model of the planet. It would help enormously if you could tell me which FE map you're going for, and how far it is between the various continents, cities etc. No need to do all of them, of course. Just some examples, like the Addis - Sao Paulo route we were discussing earlier with Tom, who seems to have gone very quiet on the subject.

- now we need a mechanism. We've got to somehow simultaneously broadcast the wrong location for all of our aircraft on the ADS-B frequency, whilst at the same time making sure they don't hit each other...I guess we transmit a real and a fake signal? So we have to get all the avionics designers to build in a FE map and a RE map and make sure they transmit both. So all the avionics people are in on it...and what do we do about the pilots? Are they in on it too? Because if we're gonna fake it, we either need to bring them in on the scam or somehow convince them that all their great circle training (a key part of the ATPL exam) is actually real...but what happens if they look ou the front of the cockpit and see that they're flying over Seattle when they should be over LA according to RE? Best we bring them in on the conspiracy. All of them.

- or do we somehow broadcast some satellite (are we allowed those? I do see them wizzing by in the night sky, or are those just projections?) signal down that fakes the position of all the aircraft, at the right time, and with the right simulated range based on their altitude? So we'll need a team of people to monitor all the flights, globally, and make sure their planned and real positions are faked, in real time, just perfectly to align with our nefarious RE model. And every time a flight diverts, anywhere on the planet, we'll need to update the system quickly to make sure the mask doesn't slip. We'd have got away with too, if it wasn't for that pesky author and his book that this bloke quoted on some wiki.

- that would still give us a problem with the pilots, though, wouldn't it? Because they're all planning and flying great circles. So they must be in on it. Or not looking out the window.

Or you tell me? How would it all work? Who would be in on the conspiracy?



Offline Action80

  • *
  • Posts: 2024
    • View Profile
Re: The Bipolar Model- An Investigation.
« Reply #51 on: March 24, 2022, 06:15:31 PM »
Oh, yes, I am sure all the statements you make are absolutely necessary to support the concept, but other than you typing them out feverishly here on this forum in your daily, for pay capacity, what evidence do you have that it would be a "monumental task, requiring an army..."

None.

You are blowing smoke.

Gubment interferes with all kinds of data, all the goddamn time.

I have no idea who you're trying to zoom with this pablum you are typing out, but it ain't working.

They do not even bother posting fake real time data of FR24 for these supposed AU to SA flights, so the claim gubment cannot fake any of it, or even all of it, at the exact same time, is just nonsense.

I'm deeply flattered that you're accusing me of being a shill.

I'm not 100% clear what you mean by your last sentence there, but I think you're saying that, because there isn't complete data for oversea flights, the government is therefore capable of faking all the flights? Is that right? Because it makes no sense whatsoever. There's a very good reason why there isn't global coverage for FR24, and it's because the data goes direct from the aircraft to the ground stations, and hence has a limited range (I'll let you ponder why that may be...hint: it depends on the altitude of the aircraft), so if there aren't any ground stations, you won't get coverage. You can try to bake that into your conspiracy all you like, but it's an easily verifiable fact. Just buy your own gear and have a play. It's super simple - just a TV aerial and a usb stick, and you can just watch the raw data if you're really keen, or run it through some software, like FR24's, and watch it all on a map.
So, I am correct here.

You've asked 'what evidence' for the number of people required to do the fakery. Well, I don't think 'evidence' is the right word, as I'm being asked to prove something that isn't happening...
Look buddy, forgetting the rest of your smoke, as that is all it is...

You made a claim.

As a reminder, you stated words, "It would be a monumental task, requiring an army..."

I am asking you for evidence to support that claim.

Either you have it or you don't.

Relatively easy to say "Here you go," or "Yeah, I got busted on that one."
It's so hard to have faith in humanity when they do shit like this.

"I hate the police so I'm gonna burn a Walgreen's!"

Offline SteelyBob

  • *
  • Posts: 756
    • View Profile
Re: The Bipolar Model- An Investigation.
« Reply #52 on: March 24, 2022, 06:52:17 PM »


I'm deeply flattered that you're accusing me of being a shill.

I'm not 100% clear what you mean by your last sentence there, but I think you're saying that, because there isn't complete data for oversea flights, the government is therefore capable of faking all the flights? Is that right? Because it makes no sense whatsoever. There's a very good reason why there isn't global coverage for FR24, and it's because the data goes direct from the aircraft to the ground stations, and hence has a limited range (I'll let you ponder why that may be...hint: it depends on the altitude of the aircraft), so if there aren't any ground stations, you won't get coverage. You can try to bake that into your conspiracy all you like, but it's an easily verifiable fact. Just buy your own gear and have a play. It's super simple - just a TV aerial and a usb stick, and you can just watch the raw data if you're really keen, or run it through some software, like FR24's, and watch it all on a map.
So, I am correct here.

No, you are not. You haven't made any sense at all, and you've misunderstood or are ignoring everything I said. Are you going to try and engage on the ground coverage issue? Or just hurl shill insults around?

You've asked 'what evidence' for the number of people required to do the fakery. Well, I don't think 'evidence' is the right word, as I'm being asked to prove something that isn't happening...
Look buddy, forgetting the rest of your smoke, as that is all it is...

You made a claim.

As a reminder, you stated words, "It would be a monumental task, requiring an army..."

I am asking you for evidence to support that claim.

Either you have it or you don't.

Relatively easy to say "Here you go," or "Yeah, I got busted on that one."


Again, I explained myself clearly, and you've completely ignored it. You can't 'evidence' a hypothetical. It's perfectly reasonable for you ask for justification, and I've done just that - I provided a reason for my statement, which you've culled off your quote of my comment and failed to engage with, presumably because you either don't understand it, or don't have the metal capacity to coherently engage with it.

Re: The Bipolar Model- An Investigation.
« Reply #53 on: March 24, 2022, 08:33:50 PM »
The position data transmitted by ADS-B is the location received by a global navigation satellite system (GNSS) receiver on the aircraft.  We know that GNSS is accurate and repeatable. 

There are 4 systems in operation from Russia, Japan, Europe and the US and no reason to doubt them.

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 3374
    • View Profile
Re: The Bipolar Model- An Investigation.
« Reply #54 on: March 25, 2022, 08:49:43 AM »
You've asked 'what evidence' for the number of people required to do the fakery. Well, I don't think 'evidence' is the right word, as I'm being asked to prove something that isn't happening...
Look buddy, forgetting the rest of your smoke, as that is all it is...

You made a claim.

As a reminder, you stated words, "It would be a monumental task, requiring an army..."

I am asking you for evidence to support that claim.

Either you have it or you don't.

Relatively easy to say "Here you go," or "Yeah, I got busted on that one."

Here you go:


Offline Action80

  • *
  • Posts: 2024
    • View Profile
Re: The Bipolar Model- An Investigation.
« Reply #55 on: March 25, 2022, 11:34:52 AM »


I'm deeply flattered that you're accusing me of being a shill.

I'm not 100% clear what you mean by your last sentence there, but I think you're saying that, because there isn't complete data for oversea flights, the government is therefore capable of faking all the flights? Is that right? Because it makes no sense whatsoever. There's a very good reason why there isn't global coverage for FR24, and it's because the data goes direct from the aircraft to the ground stations, and hence has a limited range (I'll let you ponder why that may be...hint: it depends on the altitude of the aircraft), so if there aren't any ground stations, you won't get coverage. You can try to bake that into your conspiracy all you like, but it's an easily verifiable fact. Just buy your own gear and have a play. It's super simple - just a TV aerial and a usb stick, and you can just watch the raw data if you're really keen, or run it through some software, like FR24's, and watch it all on a map.
So, I am correct here.

No, you are not. You haven't made any sense at all, and you've misunderstood or are ignoring everything I said. Are you going to try and engage on the ground coverage issue? Or just hurl shill insults around?
Yeah, I am correct.

In this case, there's no such data to begin with.
You've asked 'what evidence' for the number of people required to do the fakery. Well, I don't think 'evidence' is the right word, as I'm being asked to prove something that isn't happening...
Look buddy, forgetting the rest of your smoke, as that is all it is...

You made a claim.

As a reminder, you stated words, "It would be a monumental task, requiring an army..."

I am asking you for evidence to support that claim.

Either you have it or you don't.

Relatively easy to say "Here you go," or "Yeah, I got busted on that one."
Again, I explained myself clearly, and you've completely ignored it. You can't 'evidence' a hypothetical. It's perfectly reasonable for you ask for justification, and I've done just that - I provided a reason for my statement, which you've culled off your quote of my comment and failed to engage with, presumably because you either don't understand it, or don't have the metal capacity to coherently engage with it.
If you are not going to justify your claim, other than with, "Listen, buddy, I'm an expert, and experts are welcomed here on a flat earth forum, so pay attention to what I write!", I think the discussion is rather useless. You are no expert in this discussion at all or anything else for that matter.

You have no evidence whatsoever to justify your claim that it would be a "MONUMENTAL TASK, REQUIRING AN ARMY!!!" for a government to tamper with flight recording data.

But even if it would be a monumental task or did require an army, existing armies are primarily in the service of...wait for it...government and do accomplish quite a lot of monumental things.
« Last Edit: March 25, 2022, 11:57:11 AM by Action80 »
It's so hard to have faith in humanity when they do shit like this.

"I hate the police so I'm gonna burn a Walgreen's!"

Offline Gonzo

  • *
  • Posts: 52
    • View Profile
Re: The Bipolar Model- An Investigation.
« Reply #56 on: March 25, 2022, 11:42:41 AM »

In this case, there's no such data to begin with.


Can you explain what you mean here, please? What data are you saying doesn't exist?

Offline Action80

  • *
  • Posts: 2024
    • View Profile
Re: The Bipolar Model- An Investigation.
« Reply #57 on: March 25, 2022, 11:58:04 AM »

In this case, there's no such data to begin with.


Can you explain what you mean here, please? What data are you saying doesn't exist?
Read Steely Bob's post.

He says there is no data.
It's so hard to have faith in humanity when they do shit like this.

"I hate the police so I'm gonna burn a Walgreen's!"

Offline Gonzo

  • *
  • Posts: 52
    • View Profile
Re: The Bipolar Model- An Investigation.
« Reply #58 on: March 25, 2022, 12:05:24 PM »
Does it stem from this?

Quote
They do not even bother posting fake real time data of FR24 for these supposed AU to SA flights, so the claim gubment cannot fake any of it, or even all of it, at the exact same time, is just nonsense.

Offline Action80

  • *
  • Posts: 2024
    • View Profile
Re: The Bipolar Model- An Investigation.
« Reply #59 on: March 25, 2022, 02:10:32 PM »
Does it stem from this?

Quote
They do not even bother posting fake real time data of FR24 for these supposed AU to SA flights, so the claim gubment cannot fake any of it, or even all of it, at the exact same time, is just nonsense.
Which was confirmed by SteelyBob.

No real-time data.

Which means there are no real-time flights taking place at the time where real-time data is not posted.
It's so hard to have faith in humanity when they do shit like this.

"I hate the police so I'm gonna burn a Walgreen's!"