HOAGLAND PRESS CONFERENCE WILL BE ON INTERNET IRC (fwd)
Shepherd
> Hoagland Press Conference LIVE on Internet IRC
>
> (This is from Richard Hoagland's WWW page --Steve Wingate)
>
>
> The Hoagland Press Conference will be LIVE on the IRC channel #Art_Bell at
> 9AM EST Thursday, 3/21/96. The channel will present live reporting from the
> site and prepared speech text will be posted to the channel, at the time of
> the speeches. The #Art_Bell channel will be one-way only, so no others will
> be able to post to this channel during the news conference.
>
The company where I work wont let us use IRC..
can someone just post the transcript of the conference here? thanks.
---------------------------------------------------------
These are my opinions, not the company's.
The truth is out there;...well, ok , maybe the
truth ISNT out there. yeah, well, whatever.
James Shannon
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 08:39:17 -0800 (PST)
From: Allan
To: art-be...@primenet.com
Subject: [ART] conference
I figured out that the IRC channel was on EFnet and how to get there but
when I was able to tune in I got the tail end of the conference...So I saw
very little of it. It ended about 8:15 PST.
Going to the IRC Undernets wasted almost 2 hours...AB or Keith should have
told us to go to the EFnet. Thanks Keith.
-
To get a copy of the guidelines, E-mail "majo...@primenet.com" and put in
the message "info art-bell-fans". Remove any signature from the post.
____________________________________________________________________
Steve Wingate
Hoagland Press Conference LIVE on Internet IRC
(This is from Richard Hoagland's WWW page --Steve Wingate)
The Hoagland Press Conference will be LIVE on the IRC channel #Art_Bell at
9AM EST Thursday, 3/21/96. The channel will present live reporting from the
site and prepared speech text will be posted to the channel, at the time of
the speeches. The #Art_Bell channel will be one-way only, so no others will
be able to post to this channel during the news conference.
You may submit questions to the reporter on scene on IRC Channel #Hoagland
and they will be forwarded during the Q&A session by IRC channel operator
"Arteest". So open Channels #Art_Bell and #Hoagland and watch the news
conference in one channel and watch for responses and ask questions in the
other. See ya there!
^
<<<<<<|>>>>>>
<<<<< st...@linex.com >>>>>
<<<<<<< http://www.linex.com/ufo >>>>>>>
<<<<<<<<< Anomalous Images and UFO Files >>>>>>>>>
<<<<<< Citizens Intelligence Access BBS 415.927.2435 >>>>>
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<*>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
James Shannon
From: Allan
To: art-be...@primenet.com
Subject: [ART] Conference
The conf is being monitored on EFnet.
Go to IRC and type "/server irc.cris.com 6667"
James Shannon
and engineers were with Richard Hoagland giving the press briefing:
These included (excuse the spelling) Marvin Czarnik, a retired aerospace
engineer who worked for Grumman; Ken Johnson who works for Boeing and was
with NASA as a Test Command Pilot; Ron Nicks, a geologist formerly with
the Battell Institute; Alex Cook; Dr. Brian Moore, who worked at Kennedy
Space center for 2 years and currently is involved with lunar construction
techniques; and Robert Fiertek, and architect.
The media showed up all right -- but *nothing* as yet has gotten
out to the people. The video footage has been taken. We must
get the media broadcast it. We cannot let them just sit on it!
James Shannon
The following is an IRC log of the Richard Hoagland press briefing.
The e-mail address of the sender has been deleted in respect of
his privacy.
__________________________________________________________________
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 12:43:28 -0800
From: Keith
Subject: Re: HOAGLAND
Session Start: Thu Mar 21 06:10:01 1996
* Logging #art_bell to: [#art_bel.log]
[6:13] <Arteest> hey RCH...just in time :)
[6:14] <Arteest> sorry..took me a while to find your nick to
give you voice here :)
[6:14] <Arteest> RCH...whatever you type to this channel will
be seen by everyone here
[6:15] <Arteest> they cannot currently send text here
however....they are using #hoagland for discussion
[6:15] <RCH> Richard Hoagland is at the podium and has invited
the press to come up and view the giant photos and murals of
the lunar landscape that has been made.
[6:16] <RCH> Richard Hoagland is explaining to the press about
the initiation of the investigation of the Viking images,
which begain his journey.
[6:17] <Arteest> RCH ..question of how many press are there?
[6:17] <RCH> RCH (Richard Hoagland) is discussing the high sun
angle of the Face on Mars.
[6:18] <RCH> Mars is still being discussed. Wait.
[6:19] <RCH> The geometric placement of the city at cy==cydonia
on Mars is being described with the concomitant geometrical
constant relationships.
[6:19] <RCH> The message of the mathematical layout of the
artifacts on Mars is being described.
[6:20] <RCH> We have a full try of slides of the data from Mars
that must be given as a segue to the lunar data.
[6:21] <RCH> RCH is explaining that the artifacts on Mars were
layed out in a geometrical symmetry as a language to anyone
who happened to find them in the future.
[6:22] <RCH> RCH is discussing the significance of the 19.5
latitude and its relationship to hyperdimensional physics.
[6:23] <Awood> Question: are the NASA engineers there?
[6:23] <RCH> RCH is discussing the great dark spot on Neptune
and how he and his colleagues predicted that Voyager would
see this based on the great spots
[6:24] <RCH> on Jupiter at 19.5, sunspots at 19.5,Uranus's
great spot at 19.5.
[6:24] <RCH> RCH is explaining how the lunar project is an
extension of the Mars data.
[6:26] <RCH> RCH is explaining that the mathematics at Giza is
the same math that is found at the cydonia region of Mar.
[6:27] <RCH> Is the tetrahedral mathematics apparent on the
lunar plane--yes.
[6:27] <RCH> RCH is now introducing Marving Czarnik - our
retired aerospace engineer.
[6:28] <RCH> Mr. Czarnik is at the podium.
[6:28] <RCH> He was formerly with Grumman.
[6:29] <RCH> Mr. Czarnik has formed a group independent of
Hoagland's group looking into the anomalies on the Moon.
[6:29] <RCH> He is concerned about the value of the monies
spent since the founding of the NASA.
[6:30] <RCH> He is concerned about how more money is spent to
preserve entertainment motion pictures than is spent on
preserving the lunar photos at NSSDC.
[6:31] <RCH> Mr. Czarnik is concerned about how he could have
participated in sending men to the moon without knowing what
is on the moon.
[6:32] <RCH> Mr. Czarnik claims he has accepted Hoagland's
challenge to verify his finding.
[6:32] <RCH> He has reviewed Hoagland's work by ordering the
same prints and negatives from the NSSDC.
[6:33] <RCH> Washington University has been one of the archives
that he has ordered from.
[6:33] <RCH> He has focused on the Shard, the Crystal Palace
and other objects, but they believed that the Shard is the
most interesting
[6:34] <RCH> because it does not have to be enhanced.
[6:34] <RCH> Czarnik is now presenting a slide show.
[6:34] <RCH> His first image is the distance shot of the Shard.
[6:34] <RCH> It is protroduing above the surface of the Moon.
[6:35] <RCH> His findingshave revealed that the Shadow
underneath the Shard is not a shadow at all but an object.
[6:36] <RCH> He has multiple images from NASA of this image.
[6:36] <RCH> He has correlated some of the comments that the
astronauts have made in describing the lunar surface.
[6:37] <RCH> And has had lengthy conversations with Mr. Shabaz
the chief trainer of the astronauts.
[6:37] <RCH> Czarnik is now discussing the Brookings report.
[6:38] <RCH> Hoagland is back at the podium.
[6:39] <RCH> RCH is describing the Shard as having been
photographied from 250 miles away.
[6:39] <RCH> RCH is about to introduce the next speaker.
[6:40] <RCH> He has on screen the triangular shadow of the
crater Ukert.
[6:41] <RCH> There are technical difficulties, please wait.
[6:42] <Arteest> RCH can you answer the question about any NASA
engineers being there please?
[6:42] <RCH> Can not answer, RCH is at podium and speaking.
[6:43] <RCH> The next speaker is Ken Johnston, formerly with NASA, currently with Boeing.
[6:44] <RCH> Mr. Johnston is at the podium.
[6:44] <RCH> He is giving his background.
[6:44] <RCH> In 1966, he left the Marines and was a consultant
and test pilot with Grumman.
[6:45] <RCH> He amassed 3,000 hours as a spacepilot himself.
[6:45] <RCH> He was the test command pilot, at the JohnsonSpace
Center.
[6:46] <RCH> This is not a verbatim transcript.
[6:46] <RCH> I will sign off if this rudeness continues.
[6:47] <RCH> I cannot type verbatime, do you understand this.
[6:47] <RCH> This is a summary.
[6:47] <Arteest> please do NOT message RCH with any questions
or comments...put them publically in #hoagland please
[6:48] <RCH> Mr. Johnston is describing photos that he saw
while he was in charge of the photo archive at the Johnson
Space Centre.
[6:50] <RCH> He is describing a viewing of the one of the films
taken by the astronauts on Apollo footage with plumage that
was removed from this film within 24 hours--mysteriously.
[6:50] <RCH> He was at Johnston through all the missions.
[6:52] <RCH> This is not working, I am signing off shortly.
[6:52] <RCH> Arteest, Keith Morgan here where is the quite
channel?
[6:53] <Arteest> RCH...hang on just a sec and I will message
you
[6:53] <Keith-R> RCH, there are many here who are still
watching, please ignore the idoits who want to ruin it for
us all. Just keep typing and ignore them. Keith Rowland
[6:53] <RCH> ok
[6:53] <RCH> will try
[6:53] <RCH> hard to hear speakers from here and speaking very
fast.
[6:54] <Arteest> then just sit and listen there and give us
reports at breaks if you want
[6:54] <RCH> Johnston is showing letters verifying that he gave
Hoagland the photos of Apollo 14 that he has here at the
conference.
[6:55] <Arteest> QUESTION FOR RCH How does Hoagland/speakers
appear to
[6:55] <Arteest> be going over with press?
[6:55] <RCH> The next speaker is Ron Nicks a geologist (formerly with Battelle Institute).
[6:58] <RCH> As prelude to Mr. Nicks, Hoagland is discussing an Earth-based photo of the Moon.
[6:58] <RCH> In the center of the Moon, there is a l6 mile diametre crater with an equilateral triangle, which links Mars to the Moon.
[6:58] <RCH> The Shard is being discussed again at an important
frame from Lunar Orbiter 4.
[6:58] <RCH> Behind the Shard is what is called the Cube, it is over seven miles high.
[6:59] <RCH> Seven miles sounds outrageous by terrestrial
standards, however in the l930s mile high Earth constructed
buildings were being discussed as being possible.
[7:00] <RCH> Surveyor 6 photo of the "brilliant beads" is being
described for the press.
[7:00] <RCH> Photo enhancing reveals geometric structure in the
solar light being cast with the sun being l hours below the horizon.
[7:01] <RCH> With the sun below the horizon, there should be no
patterns visible in the corona.
[7:02] <RCH> Apollo frame 4822 is being shown.
[7:02] <RCH> Hoagland is discussing the haze around the
landscape as not being an artifact of the processing.
[7:03] <RCH> pause.
[7:09] <Arteest> if ppl would quitt messaging me..I COULD op
him !
[7:09] <Arteest> thank you
[7:10] <RCH> Why is the material so reflective and diverse.
How can you account for the hazing.
[7:10] <RCH> pause
[7:11] <RCH> Why after so many years and so much money, why are
there no answers to the persistent claims of anomalies. As
a geologist,
[7:12] <RCH> he can not come up with a geometric model for
these objects.
[7:12] <RCH> Clear to the horizon where the detail is, the sky
should be clear, but it is hazy.
[7:14] <RCH> Mr. Nicks is excited about the possibility of
these objects being artificial and is calling for more work
to be done with a review of the old NASA data bases with
1990s technology (with scanners and photo optic software).
[7:15] <RCH> Hoagland is describing Cernan and Stafford's
Apollo photos taken with the Hassleblad photos of frame
AS10-32-4822.
[7:16] <RCH> The frame 4822 is blanked out in the NASA
catalogs, which encouraged Hoagland and his associates to
order this frame.
[7:17] <RCH> Near Manileus there is a retilinear feature
hanging 9 miles above the surface of the Moon which is being
shown to the press.
[7:18] <RCH> A large fragment of glass Hoagland calls the
Castle.
[7:19] <RCH> Hoagland is showing the frame and how the sun is
coming up on the right, but the photo is very dark where the
Sun is, which is highly improbable without something
blocking the view.
[7:20] <RCH> Alex Cook, a student and amateur astronomer is one
of the MarsMission associates who ordered the 4822 frame
from NASA's blacked out catalog.
[7:20] <RCH> He ordered 4822 from NSSDC at Goddard.
[7:21] <RCH> He received a negative from NSSDC and took it to
the lab at his college to process.
[7:22] <RCH> He is giving the frame numbers from apollo 1.
[7:22] <RCH> correction apollo 10
[7:23] <RCH> He found that on order 4822 several times that he
received more than one version of it.
[7:23] <RCH> He subsequently found a confirming photo of the
Castle on AS10-32-4822.
[7:24] <RCH> This print was taken a second or two after the
first frame analyzed by Hoagland.
[7:24] <RCH> He discovered that there are 10 different versions
of 4822 in NASA's catalog.
[7:25] <RCH> Hoagland is now describing the city Square on
4822.
[7:25] <RCH> He is now showing the press what is called the
"crystal palace", just above the Square.
[7:27] <RCH> Hoagland is digressing to discuss the strange case
of the 10 separate versions of AS10-32-4822. NASA seems to
be underreporting in its catalog the number and designations
of its images.
[7:29] <RCH> There are vast fields of reflective material which
is catching sunlight as the command module is flying by and
the astronauts are photographing the landscape.
[7:30] <RCH> The crystal palace is a sun-glint over a mile
wide. What geological model do we have for this if it is
purely natural?
[7:30] <RCH> Hoagland is showing the press how the shadows on
4822, which should be pitch black, are in fact light grey.
[7:31] <RCH> What is the geological model of light grey
shadowing without atmosphere to scatter light?
[7:32] <RCH> Hoagland is describing some of the cabelling on
the surface of the Moon.
[7:33] <RCH> For those who think it is a scratch, how do three
scratches make the same curve and know where it is on the
surface.
[7:33] <RCH> Hoagland is showing the hazing on 4822 when the
contrast is simply turned up.
[7:34] <RCH> Hoagland is showing the difference between an
objected and a scratch.
[7:35] <RCH> When the structures are enhanced, geometric
markings, layerings and cells show up (way above the pixel
level).
[7:35] <RCH> Hoagland is showing the top of the Castle with
cabelling aligned at the top of the object.
[7:37] <RCH> Hoagland is showing the top of the enhanced
version of the Castle, showing the layering and cellular
structure inside the Castle.
[7:37] <RCH> This frame was given to Hoagland by someone inside
NASA.
[7:38] <RCH> When Hoagland took the leaked photo to NSSDC, he
was told that the image original had disappeared from the
NSSDC library.
[7:39] <RCH> Brian Moore, Ph.D., lunar construction techniques,
Moore space, Inc., is at the podium.
[7:39] <RCH> Dr. Moore worked at Kennedy Space Center for two
years.
[7:40] <RCH> Dr. Moore is giving his background, both
educational and professional.
[7:40] <RCH> Dr. Moore has also examined some of the prints
that Hoagland has been looking at for verification.
[7:42] <RCH> Moore verifies that he has seen the same geometric
patterns show up on these frames.
[7:42] <RCH> He is here to encourage further research of the
old NASA databases.
[7:43] <RCH> He does not have the geologic backround to verify
or disproove, but verifies that he has seen all of the
images and there are anomalies on the photos that beg to be
explained.
[7:44] <RCH> Robert Fiertek, architect, Fiertek Design is at
the podium.
[7:44] <RCH> Fiertek's interest spans 9 years in the anomalies
of both the Moon and Mars.
[7:45] <RCH> He began with Mars.
[7:46] <RCH> He is showing the press the catenary shapes
visibile in 4822.
[7:48] <RCH> Fiertek is explaining how the special formulation
of film used for photographing the lunar landscape.
[7:48] <RCH> For a grey landscape with a black sky only black
and white should be necessary.
[7:49] <RCH> The Astronauts on the apollo 14 mission, used
color film. Color frames are now being shown.
[7:50] <RCH> The color was used for infrared photography, on
photos being show of a grey surface and black sky, why.
[7:50] <RCH> Fiertek is showing a black and white image called
the battleship.
[7:51] <RCH> He is now showing an image of the Clementine
mission.
[7:52] <RCH> This infrared image shows geometry over the same
area of Sinus Medii that the old photos of 4822 did.
[7:53] <RCH> Fiertek is explaining how false color was added to
show the various regions, densities and mineral content.
[7:55] <RCH> Fiertek is showing his architectural geometric
overlays between the Ukert and Triesnecker craters from the
Clementine image, over the same area as 4822.
[7:56] <RCH> Fiertek is showing the rectilinear alignments in
the blow ups of Triesnecker.
[7:57] <RCH> He hasdone CAD programs tto drawn architectural
overlays of the Clementine image in order to rectify it with
4822 and there is correspondence.
[7:58] <RCH> Fiertek is discussing how we know this material is
glass.
[7:59] <RCH> His CAD program took 27 hours to generate the same
rectilinear patterns as the analog enhancements.
[8:01] <RCH> In other words, the computer program is generating
perfect replicas of the gridwork which seems to be
rectilinear and gridlike to the eye.
[8:02] <RCH> Hoagland is back at the podium and is changing
slide trays-pause.
[8:02] <RCH> Hoagland is being asked why the astronauts have
remained silent about this.
[8:04] <RCH> Hoagland is reminding the press that the Brookings
report warned of the destruction of civilization if we were
to find artifacts on the Moon or Mars.
[8:04] <RCH> Back to the astronauts.
[8:04] <RCH> He doesn't know why the astronauts have remained
silent.
[8:05] <RCH> Sara McLendon is asking about who constructed
these artifacts.
[8:06] <RCH> Another journalist is wondering why the SETI
programme appears to search for extraterrestrial life, yet
ignores this data.
Session Close: Thu Mar 21 08:12:40 1996
RCH cancelled connect due to harrasment by IRC users.
--
---------
James Shannon
*anything* on what happened is coming out. Here is one just received
from the list. [The e-mail address of the sender has been removed
in respect of their privacy.]
______________________________________________________________________
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 12:18:50 -0600 (CST)
From: PT
To: art-be...@primenet.com
Subject: [ART] Non-coverage of RH Press Conference
This is what makes me a bit jaded. I've been trying to get
information on the RH press conference all morning, and besides the few
posts here, I've heard nada, zilch.
The point of this conference was to be able to provide information
to the public. Whether or not this information would prove to be valid would
be determined in an objective, public debate following the presentation.
Ignorance is not a valid excuse for any of the journalists who were present,
afterall that's what background research is about, what their career
qualifications demand. If these journalists were unable to comprehend the
arguments presented, they simply needed to record the conference material
and ask questions afterwards. If one is skeptical about the Hoagland
material, one should have reason to be based upon knowledge of that material
as a whole. Ignorant, apathetic, and disinterestd opinions are invalid and
nonobjective. Skeptics may disagree, but this is censorship, and it is
unjustifiable. This is a sad day for us purists interested in the scientific
pursuit for objective knowledge.
Again, this is why I am jaded.
PT
Dean Adams
James Shannon <jam...@unixg.ubc.ca> wrote:
> This is what makes me a bit jaded. I've been trying to get
>information on the RH press conference all morning, and besides the few
>posts here, I've heard nada, zilch.
That is because there is nothing to hear. i.e. NO NEWS.
> The point of this conference was to be able to provide information
>to the public.
Wrong. The point of the conference was to get as much publicity
as possible for Hoagland, to boost his sagging image and sales.
> Whether or not this information would prove to be valid would
>be determined in an objective, public debate following the presentation.
Sorry, it is not the job of the national media to hand over valuable
air time to every shill and crackpot who holds a "press conference".
>Ignorance is not a valid excuse for any of the journalists who were present,
But it is the primary "excuse" for the people who fall
for Hoagland's empty sales pitch.
jr...@marshill.com
>
> I just thought this would be an interesting thread to start. No doubt many
> paranoiacs out there will find grist for their mills. (i.e., why was there
> no "black box" on board the plane that went down?)
>
> Awaiting further entertainment,
> CHil...@aol.com
I'm having trouble with the fact an experienced pilot would make a left
turn instead of a right turn. He had a chart showing the ILS landing
procedure for that airport. It should have told him to climb to a set
altitude and turn right. Very strange.
No, I have no IFR time, just VFR. But I have studied it.
CHill3644
Dion Janu Shore
Too funny you should say this. Soon as the plane went down, I
thought, "Gee, I wonder which one of *them* became a threat to Mr.
Clinton." I didn't think it had anything to do with UFO's, however. But
I guess if you believe in that sort of thing, it *could* be. Hmmnn...
--
Dion Janu Shore
djs...@srvr.third-wave.com
--------------------------------------------------------------
Life does not cease to be funny when someone has died
any more than it ceases to be serious when someone has laughed.
Paul Mills
chil...@aol.com (CHill3644) wrote:
>I just thought this would be an interesting thread to start. No doubt many
>paranoiacs out there will find grist for their mills. (i.e., why was there
>no "black box" on board the plane that went down?)
>
> Awaiting further entertainment,
> CHil...@aol.com
cHILL(ARY)364???????????
^^^^^^^^
You've been found out!
Surrender Dorothy!
John Teggatz
> >
> > I just thought this would be an interesting thread to start. No doubt many
> > paranoiacs out there will find grist for their mills. (i.e., why was there
> > no "black box" on board the plane that went down?)
> >
> > Awaiting further entertainment,
> > CHil...@aol.com
The plane was a military version of the 737. Military planes donšt carry
black boxes for obvious (i hope it is obvious) reasons. The weather was
horrible. As hard as it may be for some people to accept, accidents
happen. Not everything - not hardly anything - is the result of some
nefarious conspiracy. I know coping with sensless, random tragedy is
difficult, so some people fabricate some loony *explanation* to make it
easier to swallow.
JT
Ron P Hunter
>
> I'm having trouble with the fact an experienced pilot would make a left
> turn instead of a right turn. He had a chart showing the ILS landing
> procedure for that airport. It should have told him to climb to a set
> altitude and turn right. Very strange.
>
> No, I have no IFR time, just VFR. But I have studied it.
I am reminded of the U.S. chopper that "veered off course into north
Korea.it seems to me that it is not outside the realm of technology to
send out signals that would lead a pilot to think that he was on the
glide path and in fact be heading into a mountin, [where the transmitter
is located] I know it could be done.
--
Ron P Hunter http://www4.ncsu.edu/unity/users/r/rphunter/www/index.html
E mail - rphu...@eos.ncsu.edu
rphu...@granophyre.win.net
at a loss for words
Dean Adams
What does Ron Brown have to do with UFOs?
>No doubt many
>paranoiacs out there will find grist for their mills. (i.e.,
>why was there no "black box" on board the plane that went down?)
"black boxes" are requried by FAA regulations which
apply only to civil (not military) aircraft.
House Widdershins
>> CHill3644 wrote:
>> >
>> > I just thought this would be an interesting thread to start. No doubt many
>> > paranoiacs out there will find grist for their mills. (i.e., why was there
>> > no "black box" on board the plane that went down?)
>> >
>> > Awaiting further entertainment,
>> > CHil...@aol.com
>The plane was a military version of the 737. Military planes donšt carry
>black boxes for obvious (i hope it is obvious) reasons. The weather was
>horrible. As hard as it may be for some people to accept, accidents
>happen. Not everything - not hardly anything - is the result of some
>nefarious conspiracy. I know coping with sensless, random tragedy is
>difficult, so some people fabricate some loony *explanation* to make it
>easier to swallow.
>JT
One more point: the traffic flow around an airport is generally
counter-clockwise in the vast majority of cases. When confronted
with a situation where a pilot is on short final, with no field in
sight, habit takes over.
The automatic response is to turn left, and pull up. Only this time,
before he figured out he was in trouble, he had an airplane full
of mountain.
John Hutchins
William Nash
>
>I just thought this would be an interesting thread to start. No doubt many
>paranoiacs out there will find grist for their mills. (i.e., why was there
>no "black box" on board the plane that went down?)
>
> Awaiting further entertainment,
> CHil...@aol.com
From what I understand the military doesn't use black box's.Maybe someone
out there could elaborate.
SPHINX Technologies
CHill3644 <chil...@aol.com> wrote:
>I just thought this would be an interesting thread to start. No doubt many
>paranoiacs out there will find grist for their mills. (i.e., why was there
>no "black box" on board the plane that went down?)
>
> Awaiting further entertainment,
> CHil...@aol.com
I was wondering when somebody was going to start asking about this issue.
I also noted the following other discrepancies which, I must confess, had
caused me to raise the "Fishy Factor" rating of this news report a bit
above the minimum.
1. Initial reports said that wreckage had been reported *IN THE WATER*
along the planned flight path.
2. No further mention of this earlier report after the wreckage was
sighted on the mountainside.
3. Plane allegedly carried no Black Box voice/data recorder.
4. Reason for no Black Box recorder was given as "this was originally
a training aircraft and therefore was shipped from the factory without
a Black Box". Does anybody out there know if this is normal, i.e.
training craft are not so equipped? It would seem that the likelihood
of an accident would be *HIGHER* for a training craft, and that there
would *DEFINITELY* be interest in knowing what went wrong in such a craft.
5. Next day the Wall Street Journal reported a different reason for the
absence of a Black Box recorder, "for cost reasons". Does this make
sense on an aircraft used to transport (a) civilian executives and
(b) a Cabinet level officer and (c) a week earlier, the First Lady and
First Daughter?
6. Photos of the wreckage at the mountainside site appear to show much
less than an intact aircraft. This raises the question of whether
there might indeed have been damage over the water, accounting for
the initial reports of wreckage in the water, but still allowing the
larger part of the craft to be kept in the air long enough to reach
the mountainside site.
Whatever the reason for the absence of a Black Box recorder, it would seem
that this was an omission which should be corrected in future flights.
-John Sangster
Wellesley hills, MA
SPHINX Technologies
>
>"black boxes" are requried by FAA regulations which
>apply only to civil (not military) aircraft.
>
the reason there was no Black Box on board was that it was a training
aircraft. Then the next day the Wall Street Journal said it was because
of "cost reasons".
Maybe it is not required, but thought to be the normal situation, at least
by the WSJ and by this Pentagon spokesman?
-John Sangster
Wellesley Hills, MA
Harry Langford
:
: The plane was a military version of the 737. Military planes donšt carry
: black boxes for obvious (i hope it is obvious) reasons. The weather was
According to my newspaper, 12 of the 14 T-43s are equipped
with flight recorders.
Oops. No, make that 12 out of 13.
Martin H. Levin
>I just thought this would be an interesting thread to start. No doubt many
>paranoiacs out there will find grist for their mills. (i.e., why was there
>no "black box" on board the plane that went down?)
> Awaiting further entertainment,
> CHil...@aol.com
Misinformation is more like it. As a USAF officer I have flew
perhaps a million miles in our aircraft and have participated in crash
recoveries. There was no black box on the flight because the A/C was
a military airframe and as such are not required to have a
blackbox....Stop looking for conspiracies were there are none. It
looks more like Pilot error than anything else.
______________________________________________________________
Martin H. Levin (Marty) lev...@iserv.net
Instructor lev...@river.it.gvsu.edu
Dept. of Computer Science lev...@gvsu.edu
& Information Systems CIS 7604...@compuserve.com
Grand Valley State University
Allendale, MI. 49401
________________________________________________________________
Max Kennedy
: Misinformation is more like it. As a USAF officer I have flew
: perhaps a million miles in our aircraft and have participated in crash
: recoveries. There was no black box on the flight because the A/C was
: a military airframe and as such are not required to have a
: blackbox....
Is this true? Seems to me whenever I hear of a military crash, there is a
black box that is recovered in the investigation of the cause of the
crash. Others have said there are such regulations for military planes.
I'd be surprised if there was NO regulations.
Stop looking for conspiracies were there are none. It
: looks more like Pilot error than anything else.
[Why does it look like pilot error?]
12 of the 13 other planes of its type had a black box. Since this plane
was apparently being used for VIP travel at the time, having no black box
is strange.
And counting the fact that early reports stated that a black box was
recovered, a little weird.
Max Kennedy
Michael Rivero
Ron P Hunter <rphu...@unity.ncsu.edu> wrote:
>jr...@marshill.com wrote:
>
>>
>> I'm having trouble with the fact an experienced pilot would make a left
>> turn instead of a right turn. He had a chart showing the ILS landing
>> procedure for that airport. It should have told him to climb to a set
>> altitude and turn right. Very strange.
>>
>> No, I have no IFR time, just VFR. But I have studied it.
>I am reminded of the U.S. chopper that "veered off course into north
>Korea.it seems to me that it is not outside the realm of technology to
>send out signals that would lead a pilot to think that he was on the
>glide path and in fact be heading into a mountin, [where the transmitter
>is located] I know it could be done.
I've noticed that stories of suicided navigation aid maintainence
workers and theories of spoofing from the ground seem to be blossoming
into the news and the net almost as fast as the stories of wreakage in
multiple sites is vanishing.
Nobody is buying the "oops" theory, and the race is on to find a credible
scapegoat, before people start wondering just how the tail of that plane
snapped off so cleanly and in one piece.
--
============== P I X E L O D E O N P R O D U C T I O N S ==============
| Mike & Claire - The Rancho Runnamukka http://www.accessone.com/~rivero |
===========================================================================
Bill Patterson
>CHill3644 wrote:
>>
>> I just thought this would be an interesting thread to start. No doubt many
>> paranoiacs out there will find grist for their mills. (i.e., why was there
>> no "black box" on board the plane that went down?)
>>
>> Awaiting further entertainment,
>> CHil...@aol.com
>I'm having trouble with the fact an experienced pilot would make a left
>turn instead of a right turn. He had a chart showing the ILS landing
>procedure for that airport. It should have told him to climb to a set
>altitude and turn right. Very strange.
>No, I have no IFR time, just VFR. But I have studied it.
I have also heard that the Air Traffic Controller has "killed" himself
3 days afterward.
Bill Patterson
bph...@sedona.net
<><
Michael Rivero
William Nash <rna...@deltanet.com> wrote:
>In article <4k5aj2$4...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, chil...@aol.com (CHill3644) says:
>>
>>paranoiacs out there will find grist for their mills. (i.e., why was there
>>no "black box" on board the plane that went down?)
>>
>> Awaiting further entertainment,
>> CHil...@aol.com
>
>
>
>out there could elaborate.
There seems to be a case of "hiding behind words". It's true that many
military planes do not have "crash" recorders or cockpit voice recorders, but
they almost universally have "flight data" recorders which record aircraft
status and position for mission anaylsis.
So the military are being technically correct in saying there is no crash
recorder, but being less that forthright to imply that no recorders
existed at all.
And again, there should be records from the approach controller
and the AWACS.
Jale
>
> chil...@aol.com (CHill3644) wrote:
>
> >I just thought this would be an interesting thread to start. No doubt many
> >paranoiacs out there will find grist for their mills. (i.e., why was there
> >no "black box" on board the plane that went down?)
>
> > Awaiting further entertainment,
> > CHil...@aol.com
>
> perhaps a million miles in our aircraft and have participated in crash
> recoveries. There was no black box on the flight because the A/C was
> a military airframe and as such are not required to have a
> looks more like Pilot error than anything else.
> Martin H. Levin (Marty) lev...@iserv.net
> Instructor lev...@river.it.gvsu.edu
> Dept. of Computer Science lev...@gvsu.edu
> & Information Systems CIS 7604...@compuserve.com
> Grand Valley State University
> Allendale, MI. 49401
> ________________________________________________________________
It would seem to me, Martin, that military aircraft, particularly
training craft, would be MORE likely to carry black box recorders.
Are Military Training craft any less likely to have unexplained crashes
than civilian craft? If this is so then are you saying that military
craft are built safer than civilian craft?
A report on the crash printed in the 'West Australian' newspaper on
Saturday April 6 1996 stated that the explanation given by Lt-Gen.
Howell Estes was "The plane came into service as a trainer and was not
equipped with the STANDARD flight recorder".
This contradicted a statement by Croatia's air traffic chief, Miljenko
Radic, who said that "two black boxes had been found at the crash site -
one with the voice recording and the other which recorded the plane's
manoeuvres".
One thing is for sure, if there was a black box onboard, then somebody
does not want the rest of the world to know just what was recorded by
it.
Just a thought, to finish.
I seem to recall that about this time last year a military helicopter
went down, killing all, reportedly carrying a bunch of military
officials and investigators on their way to question (or was it arrest)
Bill Clinton.
Perhaps the demise of Ron Brown is some sort of payback. The dates of
these crashes must be almost exactly 12 Months apart.
Regards
Jale.
Rick White
> I just thought this would be an interesting thread to start. No doubt many
> paranoiacs out there will find grist for their mills. (i.e., why was there
> no "black box" on board the plane that went down?)
>
> Awaiting further entertainment,
> CHil...@aol.com
The MILITARY, in its infinitate WISDOM, eschews the use of Flight Data Recorders
and Cockpit Voice Recorders. This was a military plane, ergo, no "black boxes".
Carter Shanklin
cause of the crash. I have seen their "eschew obfuscation" motto many
times emblazoned on their walls.
bga...@microsoft.com
> It would seem to me, Martin, that military aircraft, particularly
> training craft, would be MORE likely to carry black box recorders.
> Are Military Training craft any less likely to have unexplained crashes
> than civilian craft? If this is so then are you saying that military
> craft are built safer than civilian craft?
> A report on the crash printed in the 'West Australian' newspaper on
> Saturday April 6 1996 stated that the explanation given by Lt-Gen.
> Howell Estes was "The plane came into service as a trainer and was not
> equipped with the STANDARD flight recorder".
> This contradicted a statement by Croatia's air traffic chief, Miljenko
> Radic, who said that "two black boxes had been found at the crash site -
> one with the voice recording and the other which recorded the plane's
> manoeuvres".
>
> One thing is for sure, if there was a black box onboard, then somebody
> does not want the rest of the world to know just what was recorded by
It is my understanding that the "black box" was not required when this
plane was built. After it was transformed into a gov. vip transport
because of the safty record of that type plane it was not installed.
Regards,
Bill
Steve Wingate
authority a pretty good little tidbit ... a guy on another list that's
stationed at McCord AFB and is a .. well I'll just quote him:
> Two things about me; 1. I'm a Staff Seageant in the USAF
>stationed here at McChord AFB & I have been a Crew Chief (aircraft mechanic)
>on cargo planes the whole 14 years that I've been in the AF. 2. I have NEVER
>touched one of these T-43's.... BUT every plane that I've worked has had
>one. Hell, the giant C-5 even has a kind of ejection system on theirs. But
>that's not the point. What I was inferring in the question was that the
>government of the country (name?) where the plane crashed said at one point
>that they had found the FDR.
>
> Bill Teague
^
<<<<<<|>>>>>>
<<<<< st...@linex.com >>>>>
<<<<<<< http://www.linex.com/ufo >>>>>>>
<<<<<<<<< Anomalous Images and UFO Files >>>>>>>>>
<<<<<< Citizens Intelligence Access BBS 415.927.2435 >>>>>
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<*>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Sam Arnold
>
>I just thought this would be an interesting thread to start. No doubt many
>paranoiacs out there will find grist for their mills. (i.e., why was there
>no "black box" on board the plane that went down?)
>
> Awaiting further entertainment,
> CHil...@aol.com
I was under the impression that there was no flight recorder because it was a
military vehicle. They don't really have the same restrictions a commercial
liner would have.
Michael Rivero
Bill Patterson <bph...@sedona.net> wrote:
>
>I have also heard that the Air Traffic Controller has "killed" himself
>3 days afterward.
No, it was the man in charge of maintaining the navigation aids at the
airport who supposedly committed suicide.
David Feustel
: The military eschews the use of black boxes in order to obfuscate the
: cause of the crash. I have seen their "eschew obfuscation" motto many
: times emblazoned on their walls.
'Eschew obfuscation' means 'Tell the truth'.
--
feu...@netcom.com
Dave Feustel N9MYI For PGP Public Key, finger feu...@netcom.com
Fort Wayne, IN Or else access http://www.mixi.net/~feustel/
219-483-1857
dmc
>One thing is for sure, if there was a black box onboard, then somebody
>does not want the rest of the world to know just what was recorded by
>it.
>Just a thought, to finish.
>I seem to recall that about this time last year a military helicopter
>went down, killing all, reportedly carrying a bunch of military
>officials and investigators on their way to question (or was it arrest)
>Bill Clinton.
>Perhaps the demise of Ron Brown is some sort of payback. The dates of
>these crashes must be almost exactly 12 Months apart.
>Regards
>Jale.
Uh oh. You figured it out.
The unmarked black helicopters are flying out of Area 51 right now
and using their hyperdimensional magneto/anti-gravity flight
capabilities to get to your house faster than you can finish eating
your Froot Loops.
They're gonna getcha. You shouldn't be so bold about pointing out the
"real" truth...
dmc
Chip McDonald of Known Space
> I was under the impression that there was no flight recorder because it was a
>military vehicle. They don't really have the same restrictions a commercial
>liner would have.
I thought I saw a report showing Ron Brown getting off a plane earlier
in the day in the region; it had the Presidential seal on it, and
appeared to be something like a 737. The report said it was the same
plane - that he went on from there to "wherever" he was going. I'm
pretty certain this was on CNN.
If the notion that it was safe enough to fly the First Lady through
the region, why the supposed military transport? Why would Ron Brown
have to switch to a military transport if Hillary didn't? Does
anybody know if she was on a military transport or one of the
president's planes?
It's also interesting they decided to go after the Freemen - and snag
the Unabomber - around about the same time. Interesting coincidence.
Webber@manhattan.com John Webber
Michael Rivero
bga...@microsoft.com <bga...@microsoft.com> wrote:
>>
>> One thing is for sure, if there was a black box onboard, then somebody
>> does not want the rest of the world to know just what was recorded by
>
>
>plane was built. After it was transformed into a gov. vip transport
>because of the safty record of that type plane it was not installed.
>
The Air Force's own regulations require a flight data recorder on
conversion to passenger use.
Vaughan Wynne-Jones
I followed the story from the time it broke and posted updates on irc in
#bosnia. What I found interesting was that orginally the plane crashed in the
sea, but by the time it had been sanitized it was on land. Initially it
crashed shortly after take off, then later it was shortly before landing.
This may just be clarity resulting from initial confusion, but its interesting
nonetheless...
+------------------------------------------+-------------------------+
+ vau...@computek.net| VWMUD Master - Windows Winsock MUD Client +
+ Vaughan Wynne-Jones | http://www.computek.net/public/vaughan/ +
+ -----------------------------------------+-------------------------+
+ 'Very Funny, Scotty.. Now beam down my clothes!' +
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
Richard Dolan
>> Misinformation is more like it. As a USAF officer I have flew
>> perhaps a million miles in our aircraft and have participated in crash
>> recoveries. There was no black box on the flight because the A/C was
>> a military airframe and as such are not required to have a
>> blackbox....Stop looking for conspiracies were there are none. It
>> looks more like Pilot error than anything else.
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Martin H. Levin (Marty) lev...@iserv.net
>> Instructor lev...@river.it.gvsu.edu
>> Dept. of Computer Science lev...@gvsu.edu
>> & Information Systems CIS 7604...@compuserve.com
>> Grand Valley State University
>> Allendale, MI. 49401
>> ________________________________________________________________
>It would seem to me, Martin, that military aircraft, particularly
>training craft, would be MORE likely to carry black box recorders.
>Are Military Training craft any less likely to have unexplained crashes
>than civilian craft? If this is so then are you saying that military
>craft are built safer than civilian craft?
What are you, an idiot? The guy just told you something that is common
knowledge by now. The rest of your weird diatribe was even more
sponge-headed, so has been mercifully snipped.
darius
Not that I endorse any of this, but I do have an open mind when it comes
to suspecting our government of not telling the complete truth. Anyway,
I was watching CNN shortly after the story about the crash broke, and it
was first reported that the black box had been recovered by the
government over there. When the news anchor asked the correspondent on
site what the reason for the descrepency was, he had no answer. Since
then, every report I have seen does not mention that first report.
Another thing that is interesting is that I understand that someone from
the airport that was in communication with the plane committed suicide.
I haven't confirmed this, so if anybody knows anything else, feel free
to speak up.
Conspiracy or coincidence, one never knows...
Darius
SPHINX Technologies
bga...@microsoft.com <bga...@microsoft.com> wrote:
>It is my understanding that the "black box" was not required when this
>plane was built. After it was transformed into a gov. vip transport
>because of the safty record of that type plane it was not installed.
a conscious decision was made that they would *NEVER* want to know what
happened if it ever went down? Was somebody setting it up as a convenient
"vehicle" for a convenient "accident"?
-John S.
Wellesley Hills, MA
a
darius <dar...@tiac.net> wrote:
<snip>
>Conspiracy or coincidence, one never knows...
Having done a little flying myself, I strongly suspect
GRAVITY as the culprit.
------------------------------------------------------
Fed up with the high cost of in-house software
development? Try the OutHouse!
(will code for food) i...@ellijay.com
---------------------------------------------------------
Max Kennedy
: Uh oh. You figured it out.
: The unmarked black helicopters are flying out of Area 51 right now
: and using their hyperdimensional magneto/anti-gravity flight
: capabilities to get to your house faster than you can finish eating
: your Froot Loops.
: They're gonna getcha. You shouldn't be so bold about pointing out the
: "real" truth...
If these forces of darkness are so unreal, how come about 40% of my income
is disappearing?
Max Kennedy
David J. Helland
>
> >
> > It would seem to me, Martin, that military aircraft, particularly
> > training craft, would be MORE likely to carry black box recorders.
> > Are Military Training craft any less likely to have unexplained crashes
> > than civilian craft? If this is so then are you saying that military
> > craft are built safer than civilian craft?
> > Saturday April 6 1996 stated that the explanation given by Lt-Gen.
> > Howell Estes was "The plane came into service as a trainer and was not
> > equipped with the STANDARD flight recorder".
> > This contradicted a statement by Croatia's air traffic chief, Miljenko
> > Radic, who said that "two black boxes had been found at the crash site -
> > one with the voice recording and the other which recorded the plane's
> > manoeuvres".
> >
> > does not want the rest of the world to know just what was recorded by
>
> plane was built. After it was transformed into a gov. vip transport
> because of the safty record of that type plane it was not installed.
>
> BillIt's my understanding that these VIP transports were scheduled to have
black boxes installed when they were "converted" for civilian use,this
did not happen for the usual reasons. (S.N.A.F.U.). The Air-Force
Commander is in fact being taken to task for this oversight, but this
may not be a matter of public record.
Donald Bruce
writes:
>>
>>I just thought this would be an interesting thread to start. No doubt
many
>>paranoiacs out there will find grist for their mills. (i.e., why was
there
>>no "black box" on board the plane that went down?)
>>
>> Awaiting further entertainment,
>> CHil...@aol.com
>
>
>
someone
>out there could elaborate.
As an engineer for the Air Force (Not IN the air force) I work on many
Air Force aircraft. Some have Black Boxes, some don't. Large passenger
aircraft (C-5, KC-10, C-141) mostly do have them, smaller fighters and
trainers do not. The military is not bound by the FAA rules that make
them mandatory for commercial air craft.
John Ritson
>It would seem to me, Martin, that military aircraft, particularly
>training craft, would be MORE likely to carry black box recorders.
>Are Military Training craft any less likely to have unexplained crashes
>than civilian craft? If this is so then are you saying that military
>craft are built safer than civilian craft?
Military training craft are likely to have more crashes, not more
unexplained crashes. Pilot error is the usual explanation.
The reasons for less black box recorders in military aircraft are:
a) If a plane crashes in 'enemy' teritory, the recorder could divulge
sensitive information.
b) Military crashes are less likely to result in lawsuits/insurance
claims requiring an accurate determination of responsibility.
John
David Feustel
: >
: > It would seem to me, Martin, that military aircraft, particularly
: > Are Military Training craft any less likely to have unexplained crashes
: > than civilian craft? If this is so then are you saying that military
: > craft are built safer than civilian craft?
: > Howell Estes was "The plane came into service as a trainer and was not
: > equipped with the STANDARD flight recorder".
: > This contradicted a statement by Croatia's air traffic chief, Miljenko
: > Radic, who said that "two black boxes had been found at the crash site -
: > one with the voice recording and the other which recorded the plane's
: > manoeuvres".
: >
: > One thing is for sure, if there was a black box onboard, then somebody
: > does not want the rest of the world to know just what was recorded by
: It is my understanding that the "black box" was not required when this
: plane was built. After it was transformed into a gov. vip transport
: because of the safty record of that type plane it was not installed.
Someone else has posted that Air Force Regulations *require* a black
box in any airplane used for passenger transport. This plane would
seem to have required a black box to be installed under that rule.
: Regards,
: Bill
--
feu...@netcom.com
Dave Feustel N9MYI - NRA Life
Fort Wayne, IN For PGP Public Key, finger feu...@netcom.com
219-483-1857 Or else access http://www.mixi.net/~feustel/
EightMan
Technologies) wrote:
>
> 5. Next day the Wall Street Journal reported a different reason for the
> absence of a Black Box recorder, "for cost reasons". Does this make
> sense on an aircraft used to transport (a) civilian executives and
> (b) a Cabinet level officer and (c) a week earlier, the First Lady and
> First Daughter?
>
> 6. Photos of the wreckage at the mountainside site appear to show much
> less than an intact aircraft. This raises the question of whether
> there might indeed have been damage over the water, accounting for
> the initial reports of wreckage in the water, but still allowing the
> larger part of the craft to be kept in the air long enough to reach
> the mountainside site.
While everyone is wrapped up in the minutiae of Black Boxes, has anyone
mentioned the rumblings that had been going on, prior to the crash that
the Sec.Comm 's department was going to be phased out anyway ?
Also, this is just _another_ 'interesting' death in the Clinton circle
going all the way back to his Governor days....A-a-a-annyway....:)
EightMan.
ACB
I think it was rapid deceleration.
Paul Gallagher
>Max Kennedy
Maybe you need a new accountant, or at least a good tax shelter?
Paul
John and Susan Hutchins
>Carter Shanklin (carter....@idsonline.com) wrote:
>: The military eschews the use of black boxes in order to obfuscate the
>: cause of the crash. I have seen their "eschew obfuscation" motto many
>: times emblazoned on their walls.
>'Eschew obfuscation' means 'Tell the truth'.
Sorry, David, according to my Funk & Wagnall,
"eschew obfuscation," means shun the confusing.
>--
>feu...@netcom.com
>Dave Feustel N9MYI For PGP Public Key, finger feu...@netcom.com
>Fort Wayne, IN Or else access http://www.mixi.net/~feustel/
>219-483-1857
Max Kennedy
: >Max Kennedy
Maybe an off shore bank account? But then I'd be dealing with the ALIENS.
Max Kennedy
klaatu
>
> dmc (d...@wolfenet.com) wrote:
> : Uh oh. You figured it out.
>
> : The unmarked black helicopters are flying out of Area 51 right now
> : and using their hyperdimensional magneto/anti-gravity flight
> : capabilities to get to your house faster than you can finish eating
> : your Froot Loops.
>
> : They're gonna getcha. You shouldn't be so bold about pointing out the
> : "real" truth...
>
> If these forces of darkness are so unreal, how come about 40% of my income
> is disappearing?
that's not the forces of darkness. That's the forces of dimness. If it was the
'real' forces of darkness, _all_ of your income would be disappearing, and you'd
like it that way.
>
> Max Kennedy
--
Be kind to your neighbors, | "When the going gets wierd the weird turn pro."
even though they be | http://www.clark.net/pub/klaatu/home.html
transgenic chimerae. | Now. Chock full of uninteresting links.
---------------------------------------------------------------
"Sarah Connor?"
David Feustel
: feu...@netcom.com (David Feustel) wrote:
: >Carter Shanklin (carter....@idsonline.com) wrote:
: >: The military eschews the use of black boxes in order to obfuscate the
: >: cause of the crash. I have seen their "eschew obfuscation" motto many
: >: times emblazoned on their walls.
: >'Eschew obfuscation' means 'Tell the truth'.
: Sorry, David, according to my Funk & Wagnall,
: "eschew obfuscation," means shun the confusing.
Do you mean 'shun the confusing (people, things or what)'?
--
feu...@netcom.com
Dave Feustel N9MYI - NRA Life
Fort Wayne, IN For PGP Public Key, finger feu...@netcom.com
219-483-1857 Or else access http://www.mixi.net/~feustel/
John and Susan Hutchins
>John and Susan Hutchins (widde...@widdershins.seanet.com) wrote:
>: feu...@netcom.com (David Feustel) wrote:
snip
>: >'Eschew obfuscation' means 'Tell the truth'.
>: Sorry, David, according to my Funk & Wagnall,
>: "eschew obfuscation," means shun the confusing.
>Do you mean 'shun the confusing (people, things or what)'?
>--
absolutely