# Anybody up for a TWA 800 discussion? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 27, 2009, 1:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anybody-up-for-a-twa-800-discussion/490944 "2009-03-27T01:32:39Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 25
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2009, 7:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anybody-up-for-a-twa-800-discussion/490944/481 "2009-05-29T19:25:59Z")
> [@Jetblast](#): > > 1. Your first entry is childish in its attempt to apply deep water quirks to 130 feet of water. It would be laughed off the stage if presented before any credible experts. It is, once again, an attempt to obfuscate or distort the true facts here. “Salinity differences in 130 feet of water” LOL! That’s an insult to anyone’s intelligence and won’t be questioned by our so-called highly sensitive information critics here. Additionally, your answer does nothing to account for why government said they couldn’t even ‘locate’ the black boxes? You really don’t know anything about anything, do you? Nada. Zip. Nothing. 1. So, you think that the salinity of sea water is constant from the surface to the bottom? Especially close to land, where fresh water flows in from rivers and streams. Let’s check this off as something you know nothing about. And obviously, it’s every bit as easy to find an orange, shoebox-sized object in several square miles of murky seafloor as it would be to find it in the middle of a football field. Did you watch that video? Obviously not, or you would notice you couldn’t see it until the camera was just a few feet away from it. Your appeals to authorities **who do not exist** are pathetic. 2. You’re the one who made the claim about incendiary shrapnel, not us, bucko. White phosphorus shells, like the Israelis apparently used, are used to create a smokescreen, with a secondary use in starting fires. They do not produce shrapnel because there is no big explosion; all you need to ignite phosphorus is to expose it to oxygen so the shell just has a small charge to bust it open. Phosphorus is not used in anti-aircraft missiles, nor are there any other sorts of incendiary anti-aircraft missiles. They use high explosives and a frangible casing. 3. And you haven’t provided the LI coroner’s report that shows that the shrapnel exists and that it is unlikely to be material from the aircraft. Or support for any of your other claims. As for the force of a fuel-air explosion, I refer you to the videos **tomndebb** linked to. 4. OTOH, ad hominem heckling may begin because the hecklee has repeatedly made outlandish claims and has refused repeated (and repeated and repeated) requests for evidence. Debate requires you to bring some knowledge to the table, and if you are called on a statement, you are required to provide evidence that it is true. So let’s go back to the beginning: Please provide the radar evidence to support your claim that radar picked up a plume of wreckage traveling at Mach 4. ---
**Author:** ![RedSwinglineOne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/a9adbd/32.png) [@RedSwinglineOne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedSwinglineOne)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2009, 7:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anybody-up-for-a-twa-800-discussion/490944/482 "2009-05-29T19:28:04Z")
> [@Jetblast](#): > > I don’t have a link for the Brookhaven test of the pellets. I’m confused. You have been quoting a website which has been giving very specific details about this report. > [@](#): > > The lab report showed that a sample pellet was composed mostly of Aluminum with traces of Titanium, Zirconium, Cerium and Barium. Such compounds are consistent with incendiary pellets used in some missiles. How is it possible to quote a report which you don’t have access to? You then have made even more specific details about the composition of the ‘pellets’. > [@](#): > > …simply because the pellets were scientifically recognized to be one single self-contained, separable material in which those substances were isolated. The same materials are self-contained in exactly the same proportions in missile incendiary shrapnel. Those are some pretty specific details. Where did you get them? You quoted a link saying this report had been made available. Where is it? > [@](#): > > Apart from the single page mentioned above, only one other forensic laboratory report out of those missing hundreds has ever been released by the FBI. It was an analysis performed by Brookhaven National Lab (BNL) to evaluate 20 small (~1/4” diameter) pellets that were removed during autopsy of the person whose ME# was 96-5037; > [@](#): > > Since the information you seek is best made available in the actual documents FBI recorded the test within it isn’t really fair to blame me for their not being available. bolding mine Is the report available, or is it not? So you accuse the FBI of witholding all info on the shapnel except this one report. You say that the FBI made this report public. You are quoting very specific details from the report. Even more specific than the website you link to. Then you defend not being able to produce this link by blaming the FBI for not making the report available. I’d like you to produce this report. If you don’t, I would like to stop quoting from it. ---
**Author:** ![Rick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9f8e36/32.png) [@Rick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2009, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anybody-up-for-a-twa-800-discussion/490944/483 "2009-05-29T19:29:17Z")
> [@Jetblast](#): > > No, no. You can’t get away with that. You simply have no credibility if you say something like that. (I thank you for basically proving what I’m saying by default by the way). > > ``` > The official investigation was supposed to be an honest government investigation of an airline crash according to its rules and laws. The investigation is supposed to evaluate all evidence and information in an honest, objective way. And it is in that way that all matters concerning it should be discussed. In no way can any airline crash be a "fifth amendment," moot court, legal defense process. The government has no right to take the fifth against itself and the public. It has to respond honestly and according to law by its own writs. Since, we've already 'legally' disproven the official story in both the explosives residue test and "zoom-climb" (not to mention instances of malfeasance in the cases of evidence removal and FBI withholding of documents) you have no right to press such a dubious double standard. It can fairly be said that it is YOUR side that has failed to prove its case and answer to the facts. > > What obviously has more weight here is government officially claimed a center fuel tank explosion caused the Flight 800 crash. It is you and the official story that has failed to support its claims. Any fool can understand what it means when people avoid obvious questions. And none of the 'noise' in response has really done anything to answer the main points. > > ``` Well I have been a semi well respected member of this board for 10 years and over 10,000 posts. You have been here for a week or so, and have zero respect that I have seen. You are not one to lecture on credibility. You have none. This in no way has “proved” you case. All it has proved is that you have nothing except hand waving. Upthread I asked you for exactly what law was broken by the government, so I guess we can add that to the pile of unsupported bullshit you have been spreading around this thread. Still waiting… Radar Missile parts Person involved Coroner’s report Metallurgical report What law(s) were broken I’m sure that there are 2 or 3 other things I have left off the list. ---
**Author:** ![Jetblast](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/71c47a/32.png) [@Jetblast](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jetblast)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2009, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anybody-up-for-a-twa-800-discussion/490944/484 "2009-05-29T19:44:05Z")
From - [WhatReallyHappened.com](http://WhatReallyHappened.com) > [@](#): > > The medical examiner said he still could not understand why passengers were not burned even though investigators have determined that the center fuel tank somehow exploded, knocking the plane out of the sky. > > The debris field also reveals that the bottom portion of the fuel tank and the air conditioning units are not found until two miles into the debris field. So if the Center Fuel Tank did explode as the initiating event, it did NOT punch downward through the belly of the plane, or that debris would have been hurled downward to lie at the very start of the debris field. ``` So the debris field has trouble with a fuel blast as the initiating cause. If, as 'tomndebb' alleged, the center tank blast somehow managed to create a bright flash it would have to be pretty strong. If it was strong it would have blasted fuel tank area materials out along with. The problem is the first two miles of debris field don't show such materials. What it does show is cabin materials and bodies from the cabin. The first fuel tank part doesn't appear in the wreckage field for 2 miles. Since the coroner said there was a remarkable lack of burns on the bodies we have to ask how a fuel blast managed to eject these people from the aircraft at the first moment? Our fuel/air blast proponents show us a mannequin being shredded by a fuel/air explosion. Yet the debris field shows no such damage to the bodies nor any burns. The cabin debris and bodies were from the reddish residue section. More about this forensic trace: http://whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/CRASH/TWA/WINGBOX/magic.html ``` ---
**Author:** ![Jetblast](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/71c47a/32.png) [@Jetblast](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jetblast)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2009, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anybody-up-for-a-twa-800-discussion/490944/485 "2009-05-29T20:04:47Z")
> [@RedSwinglineOne](#): > > I’d like you to produce this report. If you don’t, I would like to stop quoting from it. ``` You don't need me to hold your hand 'RedSwingLineOne'. You have the case number reference and source in your own hands. I'm sure you're capable of finding it if it is available outside of the withheld FBI documents. If you are alleging this test was made-up you're making a point that isn't very strong vs the documented case numbers and lawsuit references involved. You're also suggesting MIT professor Graeme Sephton went to court with a made-up laboratory test that was never challenged by FBI. (Not a very strong counter argument). Again, whether you realize it or not, all you are doing is arguing Sephton's case, for you both seek the same information FBI refuses to release over a center fuel tank explosion. These documents were clearly referenced as having the pellets sent to Brookhaven by FBI and tested for the said substances. No one challenges this but you. It was clearly spelled out that at first FBI labeled this test "secret" (why?) but then later on entered the test in the documents and simply labeled the tested substances as "source unknown". When you hide or withhold evidence it is rather easy to argue in favor of its absence isn't it? I find that less than genuine. ``` ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2009, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anybody-up-for-a-twa-800-discussion/490944/486 "2009-05-29T20:13:30Z")
Jetblast, we are still waiting for you to provide evidence concerning your claims. Specifically: 1. Please provide the radar data you claimed to have. 2. Please provide evidence of missile pieces related to the crash. 3. Please provide evidence of persons with knowledge of a conspiracy. Since you have admitted to not having access to any evidence of alleged “incendiary shrapnel” parts in TWA 800 victims, may we assume you are withdrawing the claim? Or if you choose to continue with this claim, please provide links to the report or some idea where it might be found. ---
**Author:** ![samclem](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a9a28c/32.png) [@samclem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/samclem)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2009, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anybody-up-for-a-twa-800-discussion/490944/487 "2009-05-29T20:18:36Z")
> [@Jetblast](#): > > ``` > If you are alleging this test was made-up you're making a point that isn't very strong vs the documented case numbers and lawsuit references involved. You're also suggesting MIT professor Graeme Sephton went to court with a made-up laboratory test that was never challenged by FBI. (Not a very strong counter argument). > > ``` You keep bringing up this MIT professor Graeme Sephton. He never went to MIT, and he’s a telecommunications engineer at the UMass/Amherst. Slightly less impressive. I’ll try to have more later. ---
**Author:** ![CannyDan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cannydan/32/548_2.png) [@CannyDan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CannyDan)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2009, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anybody-up-for-a-twa-800-discussion/490944/488 "2009-05-29T20:20:03Z")
An explosion is not a fire. Why can’t you (all CT’ers) seem to get this? The explosion didn’t burn passengers. It didn’t burn paint. It was an explosion. It ruptured the plane. The plane then came further apart due to dynamic forces imposed by its forward velocity. Various parts came off at various times, each with its own velocity. (Velocity meaning the vector having both speed and direction.) This all occurred over some period of time measured in dozens of seconds, and including a secondary detonation of fuel from the other tanks, and an actual fire. All of this occurred at some considerable altitude. Once all imposed velocites had been bled off all parts by air resistance, gravity (modified somewhat by continued air resistance) brought each part down somewhere on the ocean. Further distribution of the debris occurred as these parts made their way through the air/water interface where some may have lingered for a greater or lesser period before sinking at a greater or lesser rate to end up eventually on the bottom. Thus the debris field contains parts scattered rather at random over a considerable section of ocean. Any attempt to use location of a spar or a corpse in the debris field as the basis for reconstructing the events of this aircraft breakup is totally bogus. As is this link, since it is merely further nutbar speculation. It is certainly not primary evidence. [Jetblast’s link](http://whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/CRASH/TWA/WINGBOX/magic.html) But this link is instructive in another way. From it, one needs a single click to get to [this](http://whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/CRASH/crash.html) which demonstrates the mentality we’re dealing with. One additional click takes us [here](http://whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/index.html) and this is the gateway to [this](http://whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/congress.htm) Don’t know about y’all, but I’m afraid to click again-- I don’t know where it may lead. I’ll take my nut bar with a double shot of well aged Scotch, if you don’t mind. I need to be several drinks drunk to remain comfortable with this crowd. ---
**Author:** ![CannyDan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cannydan/32/548_2.png) [@CannyDan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CannyDan)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2009, 8:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anybody-up-for-a-twa-800-discussion/490944/489 "2009-05-29T20:41:35Z")
And with that I must be off on some duties. I’ll check back when I have the opportunity. **Jetblast** , you work real hard and try to pick that boo— er, I mean you get us some primary evidence, now there’s a good chap. You know, some radar data, or some missile parts, or a first hand tell-all account “I was a Flight 800 Coverup Conspirator”, or maybe a few of those famous pellets or something. But please, ::shudder::, no more of those creepy web sites! ---
**Author:** ![RedSwinglineOne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/a9adbd/32.png) [@RedSwinglineOne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedSwinglineOne)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2009, 9:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anybody-up-for-a-twa-800-discussion/490944/490 "2009-05-29T21:17:08Z")
> [@Jetblast](#): > > ``` > If you are alleging this test was made-up you're making a point that isn't very strong ... > > ``` I am doing no such thing. I do not know if it is real or not. I haven’t been able to find it. Your website lists the source as ‘from FBI’. Thats hardly a reference. You are dodging a very simple question. Was the report released to the public or was it not? If it is available, I’d like to read it to see if I agree with your interpretation of what it says. If it is available, your claim that you cant find it because the FBI is witholding it is bull. If it is not available, then everything you say regarding its contents is bull, and should not be discussed. You cant argue both sides. So… A very simple question directed to you **Jetblast** , has this report been made public or has it not? ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2009, 9:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anybody-up-for-a-twa-800-discussion/490944/491 "2009-05-29T21:49:53Z")
> [@Jetblast](#): > > Do you understand how ignoring the meaningful points in order to return to a contrived semantic point makes you look? Time to get myself a nerw irony meter. This one is pegged to the far right of 100%. = = = **Jetblast** : you keep coming in here making wild claims about what other people have said or what the investigators did or did not do, **yet you have only posted one or two links to other people making unsupported claims**. You have refused, (or simply been unable), to provide direct citations, (preferably with links so that we may pursue our own investigations), for about 95% of the claims you have posted. You have made observations about the visual evidence that others have posted that is in direct contradiction to every other poster’s impressions of the same links. Now, I am sure that in your mind you are just battling some extension of the “conspiracy,” but I assure you that such is not the case. There are posters rebutting your claims who do not even particularly like each other, yet they still find your claims lacking. I know that i am not going to persuade you to rethink your beliefs, since you clutch them so tightly, but you might want to take the objects posted to your odd claims and review your evidence in that light. When you have gotten a bit older, you might be able to see what we were trying to show you. = = = Everyone else: I am not going to close this thread as the information that is being presented is informative, but don’t you all have spouses and children who miss you after all this time swinging at smoke? ---
**Author:** ![CannyDan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cannydan/32/548_2.png) [@CannyDan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CannyDan)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2009, 10:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anybody-up-for-a-twa-800-discussion/490944/492 "2009-05-29T22:41:36Z")
**Tomndebb** , we all know that I like everyone on this board, and everybody likes me. Don’t be talkin any trash with my homies! **Jetblast** , if this was a put-on, well enough. We’ve all gotten some entertainment. But your part is becoming a bit thin and strident, and most of us probably won’t want to play much longer. If instead you genuinely are this myopically misinformed, then you really should pay a bit more attention to some of the posters here, who have much more relevant knowledge than I – or you. **Tomndebb** , I appreciate keeping the thread open, since it still may play out in either direction I’ve suggested. As for time, I’m fortunate to have some “discretionary time” between patients. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2009, 10:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anybody-up-for-a-twa-800-discussion/490944/493 "2009-05-29T22:53:03Z")
> [@Jetblast](#): > > Hardly an answer to what I wrote. > If we go back and honestly recognize context we would see that the investigation said it couldn’t locate the boxes. Since the boxes were right under the search vessel and the pingers were working (as heard by locals in nearby boats) we know something is wrong here. Especially since government offers no explanation for this. > > ``` > When the boxes were found after 2 weeks they were video-ed being found on open sea floor bottom at only 130 feet. > > This points more towards manipulation than honest accounting (as does your answer). In this case there's enough question to challenge the contents of the recorder. > > I can understand being unable to give a valid answer. > > ``` The reason the government doesn’t offer an explanation as to why it only took 7 days to find the boxes is because people capable of reason aren’t asking for it. People on this board have been relatively patient with you and that’s probably because they’re smart enough to stand back and let you dig a deeper hole. At some point it becomes painful to watch and I’ve reached that point. Best of luck with your conspiracy. ---
**Author:** ![garygnu](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/garygnu/32/2924_2.png) [@garygnu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/garygnu)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2009, 11:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anybody-up-for-a-twa-800-discussion/490944/494 "2009-05-29T23:07:30Z")
I know I’ve come to two conclusions: 1. As I stated earlier, ‘Jetblast’ has conceded defeat. 2. ‘Jetblast’ is not a Scuba diver. ---
**Author:** ![Rick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9f8e36/32.png) [@Rick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2009, 11:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anybody-up-for-a-twa-800-discussion/490944/495 "2009-05-29T23:58:06Z")
**Jetblast** if you are serious about learning what underwater recovery and salvage work is like, may I suggest you read up on it. Here is a [book](http://www.amazon.com/Men-Honor-David-Robbins/dp/0451409744/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1243641344&sr=8-3) about a guy that found a lost H-bomb underwater. Trust me it ain’t as easy as it looks or you think. ---
**Author:** ![Musicat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/musicat/32/20189_2.png) [@Musicat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Musicat)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2009, 12:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anybody-up-for-a-twa-800-discussion/490944/496 "2009-05-30T00:12:21Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > Everyone else: > I am not going to close this thread as the information that is being presented is informative, but don’t you all have spouses and children who miss you after all this time swinging at smoke? No spouse(s), no children (that I know of) and I don’t smoke. Except after… But thanks for asking. ---
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2009, 2:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anybody-up-for-a-twa-800-discussion/490944/497 "2009-05-30T02:34:43Z")
> [@Musicat](#): > > [del]… and I don’t smoke. Except after…[/del] [del]So, you’ve looked? And do you like Kipling?[/del] Jokes deleted because this is GD. ---
**Author:** ![Ale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f19dbf/32.png) [@Ale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ale)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2009, 3:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anybody-up-for-a-twa-800-discussion/490944/498 "2009-05-30T03:59:48Z")
> [@Jetblast](#): > > 1. Your first entry is childish in its attempt to apply deep water quirks to 130 feet of water. It would be laughed off the stage if presented before any credible experts. It is, once again, an attempt to obfuscate or distort the true facts here. “Salinity differences in 130 feet of water” LOL! That’s an insult to anyone’s intelligence and won’t be questioned by our so-called highly sensitive information critics here. Additionally, your answer does nothing to account for why government said they couldn’t even ‘locate’ the black boxes? Well, gee, what do I know… after all I’ve only dove through and saw with my own little beady eyes layers of salinity (known as a halocline) and temperature (called a thermocline) anywhere from half a meter down the surface to 40 meters down, sometimes it almost looks like how oil and water separate in a glass. I guess the manufacturer of my dive mask is on the conspiracy too, making me see things that just ain’t there. As for the rest, nah, won’t bother with it, it’s already been picked to pieces. ---
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2009, 4:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anybody-up-for-a-twa-800-discussion/490944/499 "2009-05-30T04:13:03Z")
My wife used to like to lie on a thermocline in a Wisconsin lake, total depth about 30 feet, and meditate. I believe that part. She claims she could do it for like 45 minutes, thanks to her training in meditation. I smile and nod when she says it. This is how you stay married since 1976. However, in a debate, when some of the parties start smiling and nodding in a patronizing way, as has happened with all but the parties who are most intent on showing how wrong he is, not to him, but to lurkers, that method has limited use. That the ocean has layers of varying salinity and temperature is known to anyone who took Oceanography 101. **Jetblast** is not one of them. ---
**Author:** ![Jetblast](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/71c47a/32.png) [@Jetblast](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jetblast)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2009, 5:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anybody-up-for-a-twa-800-discussion/490944/500 "2009-05-30T17:13:15Z")
> [@RedSwinglineOne](#): > > A very simple question directed to you **Jetblast** , has this report been made public or has it not? ``` I don't really see that as a sincere argument but rather as a tactic to deny the obvious evidence FBI refuses to release. Surely this technical point doesn't overturn what's been shown (unless you have to force it for your purposes). As with most of what's been challenged here, if we pursue it we'll find the test to be real, accurate, and documented. We can judge official story backers sincerity on availability of documents and evidence in their treatment of the St Louis bomb test which is completely documented and available, and completely dodged and ignored by these same methodical facts demanders. What authoritarian governments do is withhold documents and then accuse those questioning them of not producing the documents. We can safely assume the test was done and the documents exist simply because FBI recorded the results by identifying the substances and saying the source was "unknown". I haven't seen any credible person challenge this. The obvious answer, for anyone paying attention, is, yes, the document was made available in the FBI's official investigation and then promptly 'lost' when demanded by lawsuit. Whether the Brookhaven test exists separately can be found out. But I suspect question over its public availability is being used mainly as a device to avoid discussion of its meaning. All you are doing is outlining not my failure, but the failure of the investigation to act honestly according to airline crash investigation laws. Again, we can't allow this to be diverted. The blame squarely lies with those who refuse to release documents that should have been preserved in a controversial crash. Again, we see the critics have no problem when their sources can't come up with the documents they demand, while pretending to be sincerely interested, and pretending to be critical of the lack of documentation. The obvious response will be: "I wasn't questioning its existence or content, I was just asking if it was available," but with all we already know about it, especially considering FBI's behavior, that isn't very believable. ``` [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anybody-up-for-a-twa-800-discussion/490944.md?page=24) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anybody-up-for-a-twa-800-discussion/490944.md?page=26)