I guess my main point is that you need to be careful about claiming *uncertainty* over things which you can't be *uncertain* about. Continued waffling over the only logical conclusion derived from the best available evidence can have just as damaging an effect, by preventing forward motion based on a common consensus. It took many years for some people to come to the only logical conclusion about what caused the destruction of the Twin Towers and Building 7, and I only hope that the now obvious reality of what happened at the Pentagon does not get mired in endless circular debates - in many cases deliberately waged by less than authentic people - as has been the case recently over at 911blogger. Again, I thought this site was all about cutting through all that disinfo crap..

I don't doubt that Balsamo might have said that it would be unlikely for the government to completely fabricate the data out of thin air. But that is a far cry from suggesting that it had to be from Flight 77, or that it is 100% legitimate/non-manipulated data. The data could have been created at any time from any plane.

If, however, you are claiming that Balsamo suggested the data HAD to have been from Flight 77, or that it HAD to have been from the plane that was at the Pentagon at 9/11, then yes, I'd like to see the quote, if you don't mind.

I have a feeling you simply misunderstood his statements - much like how Hordon was unable to understand CIT's position on the ASCE report.