Keenan and others here have never implied that the flyover conclusion hurts the movement by making it look crazy, as JG does with CD. I think the criticism on here toward CIT is simply one of strategy.

It's weird, on the one hand I perfectly understand CIT's bluntness about flyover being the only possible conclusion because my brain has banged itself against the walls of my skull trying to think of an alternative scenario and I can't think of one. On the other hand I can see the "strategy" argument too... What works better: forcing the medicine down someone's throat or simply putting the "new great tasting strawberry flavor" medicine bottle on the table and letting the person take it himself? This is probably what Casseia had in mind when she remarked that "It's plenty to say that they have first-person witness accounts of a contradictory flight plan." For an even medium-smart person, flyover is of course the logical conclusion!

I'm quite blown away by the printed testimony of Dewitt Roseborough, whose remark that he was in the south parking lot, heard a huge roar above his head, looked up, and saw a low-flying plane that he feared would crash onto the highway, then his attention was caught by an explosion and fireball over where it happened. We're at a point now where we've got Roosevelt Roberts, the 2nd hand testimony reported by Diehle, and the printed (but not re-confirmed in person) testimony of Dewitt Roseborough. CIT probably isn't making a big noise about Dewitt because Dewitt won't grant a personal interview, but clearly at one point he wasn't afraid of talking.