Talk:TWA Flight 800 conspiracy theories

1201:

Flight 800." It is an alternate theory that has nothing whatsoever to do with conspiracy. Another theory, also described in the article, proposes that electromagnetic interference could have caused or contributed to the crash. This theory, too, is purely alternative to the conclusions put forth in the NTSB report on the crash, and has nothing to do with conspiracy. That is, the alternate theory does not propose that electromagnetic interference, if it indeed caused or contributed to the crash, was part of a conspiracy. Some of the alternate theories described in the article, like the missile theory, suggest that the cover-up of the crash's true cause necessarily involve criminal conspiracy, but not all alternate theories make that leap. "TWA Flight 800 alternative theories" therefore seems the more accurate and comprehensive title for the article. I will leave it for now pending discussion.

1268:"ust conspiracy theories in disguise." What's in a name? Connotation. All one has to do is label criics as "just conspiracy theorists" to completely discredit them. It seems that would create an environment where conspiracies could flourish, does it not? I admit that some (or many) conspiracy theories are blatantly "out there." But let's not forget that for a time, Woodward and Bernstein were investigating a "conspiracy theory" that turned out to actually BE a conspiracy. A healthy skepticisim is a good thing, and is sometimes justified. Merely food for thought or, if you prefer, talk for the "talk page." (Sorry, don't have my p/w info handy at the moment.) "Jororo05" 1027:

consistent w/ adhesives, and that Sanders disputed that. As far as expanding any further on that, trust me, you don't want to go there... (for anyone who thinks Sander's independent laboratory tests proved the substance consistent with rocket fuel, you need to checkout what those independent laboratories actually said, rather than just what Sanders said they said). So that section could go back and forth about "this test that test" ad infinitum (for example, the NASA testing of the solubility of explosive residues in salt water), or we can just leave it as it is now, which I think is better.

779:

casualties, and is fairly dangerous if one finds out the perpertator, eg america. Well, anyways the FBI had to cover up the attack because they couldn't intercept the missile in time. They launched 2 or 3 more missiles at the plane as a covert operation to downplay their role in the serbian war. Til this day, submarines are indetectable, and nuclear devices can be launched from anywhere in the world. Nazi Germany owned the world this way, through its superior submarine fleet whilst they can't be intercepted they can however be intercepted by other submarines via sonar radar.

1380:

TWA did not, nor does any other airline, have an "accident investigator". Rather they send a representative to the investigation. Same with Boeing. So its accurate when the article, as currently, states "...TWA chief 747 pilot Robert Terrell Stacey, who was participating in the official investigation as a TWA representative..." All those other recent edits have been inaccurate and misleading. The sticking into the lede of both articles what is a made-for-profit yet-to-be-aired TV show isn't encyclopedic and gives undue weight to "news" and "recentism".

319: 365: 347: 134: 375: 103: 224: 691:.............." First, and foremost, the Court must consider plaintiff's proffer regarding fraud, cited in his three Statements of Genuine Issue. Because the government submitted no response to this proof, plaintiff's allegations of fraud and cover-up are uncontroverted and must be viewed as conceded." Gee Mr. Pig, you seem to know more about this case than you want to admit. (apparently) 158: 32: 296: 274: 252: 168: 74: 1105:

HIGHLY BLURRED thin, dark, elongated object showing a HIGHLY BLURREED tail. As I recall, the essence of the article was the "weasel phrase" that "well if this isn't a missile, then what is it?". I have since been unable to locate said image, so concede that this is certainly not a verifiable allegation. But it is certainly interesting!

1319:

accurately track small objects ejected from the aircraft. It has received so much attention today since, in order to promote it, a "press release" became "news" as the cable company gets some free publicity. One funny item I noticed in one news story was that they declined to say how much they had paid for it. What a racket.

285: 263: 602:....."the Court reiterates that this conclusion is based on a characterization of the evidence most in the light favorable to the Plaintiff.." And WHY do you suppose the court said that? Let me answer my own question. Because the government offered no opposition to Lahr's three statements of Genuine Issue. (see below) 1318:

Actually, it doesn't change a thing. The person behind the documentary has been saying the same thing years (claiming that the radar data shows a high-velocity explosion). It is a "fringe" theory since the weight of scientific opinion is that the resolution of those radar returns isn't fine enough to

1015:

In this section is a reference to WPIX as Long Island's only TV station. WPIX is a NYC station and, as far as I know, has no special connection with Long Island (although there is a Long Island TV station, WLIW). Also, the footnote has no reference to WPIX in any way and therefore seems misleading.

778:

What happened was the serbian war ended around 1996, the russians were backing up serbia, because they knew that the west instigated regime change or a chain reaction in the slavic states. The russians launched a missile as retaliation eg regime chain or government overthrow results in mass civilian

556:

He further states: "For the purpose of determing whether Exemption 7(C) (and other FOIA provisions) are applicable, and only for that purpose, the Court finds that, taken together, this evidence is sufficient to permit Plaintiff to proceed based on his claim that the goverment acted improperly in its

1602:

In light of previous conversations of whether to rename the article to "Conspiracy Theories," I ask this: How is a meteorite, which Earth is struck by daily, hitting an aircraft a "conspiracy"? By... Who? What? The rock? I get that the theory is unlikely, but... it's also something that is a NATURAL

1352:

Correction -- "Six officials, all of whom participated in the original accident investigation, announced Wednesday morning that they have filed a petition demanding that the government reopen the investigation." These are: former National Transportation Safety Board senior investigator Hank Hughes,

1227:

If the difference between conspiracy theories (i.e., that the plane was shot down) and 'alternate theories' is important, that would seem to suggest that the alternate theories and the conspiracy theories be separated into different articles. The previous name simply served to validate the idea that

1138:

I haven't properly considered this article in terms of source reliability/notability, but seemings things like this tend to be on more on the fringe side of things, I request this article be scrutinized by some independent editors, with a possibility of changing the wording 'alternative theories' to

1026:

That whole sentence ("During the investigation, over 200 residents of Long Island reported seeing something resembling a bolt of flame move towards, and strike the aircraft before it exploded.") was inaccurate in so many ways. I've left the Sanders section now basically stating the NTSB said testing

611:

Actually, I believe they said that because the Freedom of Information Act states that that is the standard to which a plaintiff is held. The plaintiff is not required to meet "preponderance of the evidence" (the usual standard in US civil court) or "beyond reasonable doubt" (the usual standard in US

1623:

1. A mediocre strike is unlikely to occur on any aircraft in flight. The best estimate is that such an effect would happen at most in ~5000k years, provided that aviation continued to operate as similar level. 2. Even if there was a meteor strike (despite the negligible possibilities), the report

1379:

Exactly, if all the recent edits had stated something like "a former senior NTSB investigator as well as industry participants to the original investigation" that would have been fine. But all the edits have parroted the inaccurate news headlines, which just parroted the self-serving press release.

533:

This happened over a year ago, its not exactly breaking news. And this misquote, taken entirely out of context, does not convey at all what the judge meant. Judge Matz's rulings were on Rahy Lahr's right to request documents that the goverment denied him per his FOIA requests. His rulings relate to

464:

I did wonder if it would be best in the main article, which focuses on the NTSB investigation, of which the IAMAW was an invited party (their report is included in the official docket). However since the IAMAW report disagrees with the most fundamental finding of the NTSB Final Report, the probable

1322:

One, and only one, former NTSB investigator is apparently associated with it (though Vernon gross might as well I suppose). When these news reports refer to an ALPA representative as an "investigator", that's not really accurate. He was an "invited party to the investigation". As for that NTSB guy

1104:

Fairly soon after the crash, a US magazine (whose name escapes me at this stage, but I now suspect to be something similar to "The National Enquirer") published a photo that it claimed "could" have been the missile. It was a photo of a family picnic taken by a member of that family, and in it is a

1049:

article and unfortunately that will probably take a lot of my time for a while. I don't like leaving in the middle, but I think my intent is clear and that I left the glass at least "half full". I still have doubts about to what extent Donaldson and Lance can be appropriately cited in the article,

1200:

One section of the article describes an investigative report prepared by the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers. The report proposed that "a major event may have occurred on the left side of the aircraft could have contributed to or been the cause of the destruction of

566:

Almost as if he is speaking directly to Fiorentino, in his second ruling issued October 4, 2006 Judge Matz repeats: "In adopting here its previous finding that the evidence is sufficient to suggest that the goverment acted improperly in its investigation of Flight 800 (or at least performed in a

1700:

Is there any citable information regarding the reliability of the FQIS system on the 747-100? Was it like the TPMS on a car in that it often throws incorrect readings or malfunctions from environmental factors? At this point there are fairly sound and reliable investigators that now support the

478:

Fine, let's do that then. Of course this entire page has been selected for deletion, so it appears there is no legitimate way to offer anything other than the "official position." That means of course that the IAMAW submission will never see the light of day, to many who may rely on this rather

453:

The IAMAW section doesn't belong on the alternative theories page. The IAMAW was a party to the investigation and submitted its report based on the facts as they saw them. The report offers NO "alternate theory" perse and so states that the precise cause of the crash could not be determined.

918:

However, the standard for publication on Knowledge is not merely credibility, but notability. There are numerous sources listed already, several more suggested in the talk page (e.g. a book which I have not read). Some of these sources extend to television interviews and mainstream media

1679:

What would make a meteorite hit a conspiracy theory has nothing to do with being a natural possibility or that someone is throwing rocks at the plane... What would make this a conspiracy theory only has to do with whether there was a cover-up, or to sidetrack the investigation.

735:

The Ninth District Federal Court ruled that the CIA and NTSB should give me most of the information cited in my FOIA request. The agencies are appealing that decision, and we are filing a cross-appeal. Attached is our Opening Brief which is being submitted today. Ray

1353:

former TWA accident investigator Bob Young, Jim Speer from the Air Line Pilots Association . . . who else? Sometimes you need a press release and a film to spark a new look after some time has passed and the efforts by those who MAY have been covering-up are long past.

465:

cause, that reason for the TWA 800 crash was an explosion of the CWT (they state that the CWT exploded AFTER the aircraft started to break up), I think it qualifies as an alternative theory. They probably are due mention in the main article as an official dissenter.

1658:

And, as for probabilities, yes, it's extremely small. But, then again, so isn't a fuel tank exploding from a short circuit... Which also hasn't happened before or since (Pan Am Flight 214 was hit by lightning and suffered a fuel tank rupture/explosion, but not

513:"the district court found that "the government acted improperly in its investigation of Flight 800, or at least performed in a grossly negligent fashion." V # 104 at 1110. The court properly reviewed the evidence cumulatively, "taken together." 1603:

PHENOMENON that has damaged and hit things before in the past. And it's not like anyone is suggesting a "cover up" by the government or something to prevent people from finding out rocks fall from the sky and might potentially hit something.

1323:

Hank Hughes (who I do see as Chairman of the Survival Factors Group for several NTSB investigations, so "Senior NTSB Investigator" is accurate), he has been saying this for years as well. There is NOTHING new here. It's just marketing.

914:

These individuals and organizations are themselves independent. Their viewpoints are all credible inasmuch as they represent things that could have happened. The article does not claim they did happen, that's why it's titled alternative

1245:

In reality, the "alternate theories" appear to be in the main just conspiracy theories in disguise. For example the electromagnetic interference theory is currently discussed in this article as a US military aircraft causing the crash.

946:

The book “Into the Buzzsaw: Leading Journalists Expose the Myth of a Free Press” devotes an entire chapter to facts about the official suppression of the events around the TWA800 crash. It is impossible to not classify this book as a

1701:

shootdown theory. The fact that they believe that theory makes me wonder if there was something about the FQIS that leads them to believe the captain's remarks about it were not relevant. Or do they just think it was a coincidence?

898:

The article appears to be little more than a list of viewpoints by various individuals and organizations. Because of the lack of independent sources, many of these viewpoints are questionable content for an encyclopedia article.

922:

I should note that I have no personal involvement with TWA800. I vaguely recall hearing about it on the news as a kid, but had forgotten all about it until today, when I followed a rather random series of links (Steve Jobs -:

567:

grossly negligent fashion), the Court reiterates that this conclusion is based on a characterization of the evidence most in the light favorable to the Plaintiff, but does not reflect or constitute any finding by the court."

84: 646:

Right you are....almost. I most wanted to quote from the Lahr's opening brief in his appeal before the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, except I couldn't find any reference acceptable to

919:

publications. The crash itself was certainly notable, and the fact that reasonable doubt has been established around the "official" explanation of the NTSB makes these "alternative theories" no less so.

926:

TWA800) to arrive at the article. I do, however, find the possibility of a US government coverup disturbing. If that is what happened, I'd rather not see Knowledge contribute through self-censorship.

1655:...How would the investigators know what a meteorite impact on an aircraft looks like if it's never happened before or since? And, as far as I know, this has never been tested. Before or since. 328: 144: 1080:. That's not even on the same side of Long Island that Flight 800 crashed on, and if it were true, a lot more than 200 residents would've seen this "bolt of a flame," including myself. ---- 814:

I did a study of the crash and reached a conclusion that we had been lied to by the government. I am a licensed pilot with a BS in Physics. Some of the issues I found troubling were:

496:

Just wondering if there is a better way to title these sections? I'd prefer to see them titled with something that describes the theory maybe (name could be included). Is this possible?

1749: 425: 1116:

from the APOD page, you will eventually see (there's 85 pages, much of which is heated personal abuse) a well-supportable hypothesis that it is an flying insect close by.

557:

investigation of Flight 800, or at least performed in a grossly negligent fashion. Accordingly, the public interest in ferreting out the truth would be compelling indeed."

431: 1606:

To say it's an alternate theory or an unlikely/improbable theory? Absolutely. But... no one is conspiring to make rocks fall from the sky. It happens. It's natural.

1729: 1744: 1734: 1544: 1540: 1526: 237: 223: 847:

Hi Arydberg. Article talk pages are for discussing improvements to the article itself. This isn't a forum for general comments on the topic itself. Thanks.

401: 1478: 612:

criminal court) standards in order to merely gain the release of information. The whole point of the FOIA is to enable the release of information.

1739: 1724: 388: 352: 1295:

Unfortunately I don't have time to add a whole section at the moment, but the new situation really changes this article. Please update. See

543:

In his intial ruling of August 31, 2006 he wrote: "The ensuing summary characterizes the evidence in a light most favorable to the Plaintiff,

1662: 1607: 1275: 1381: 1330: 1297: 996: 1627:

I wouldn't be opposed to moving this theory to the man in article as long as the information matches facts from mainstream sources. —

1406:

What happened to this section? It's supposed to have details about the zoom climb theory but it's full of crap about Pierre Salinger.

1442: 951:. The editor and contributors are all well-known public figures. The book was published by the established publisher Prometheus Books. 56: 44: 1468: 1050:

uh, good luck! The stuff about cargo door separation can be deleted; its just OR self-published sourced stuff. Cheers, and love you!

1522:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

198: 1652:"2. Even if there was a meteor strike (despite the negligible possibilities), the report noted there was no evidence of an impact." 1458: 52: 1639: 1422: 39: 1155: 883: 795: 180: 139: 48: 1186:

Agreed. This would also match the page on 9/11 conspiracy theories. Moving as a bold edit in line with the above consensus.

1587: 1502: 114: 1512: 185:. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of 1666: 1611: 80: 1543:

to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the

1479:

https://web.archive.org/web/20070928021420/http://www.press-enterprise.com/newsarchive/1998/07/17/900658161.html

1279: 852: 186: 60: 102: 1385: 1334: 1578: 1450: 1000: 380: 1496: 1206: 1418: 1685: 1562:

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with

1550: 1482: 1358: 1306: 534:

FOIA statutes and previous case law, NOT the legitimacy of his theory on the cause of the TWA 800 crash.

120: 17: 1449:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit 1202: 55:. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about 1704: 1410: 1326: 1271: 1143: 1124: 1046: 992: 871: 783: 497: 1414: 318: 73: 1635: 1055: 1032: 971: 848: 577: 466: 1710: 1689: 1670: 1644: 1615: 1592: 1469:

https://web.archive.org/web/20121017021323/http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/reports/2000/AAR0003_app.pdf

1426: 1389: 1362: 1338: 1310: 1283: 1255: 1210: 1195: 1181: 1171: 1159: 1128: 1089: 1059: 1036: 1020: 1004: 987: 975: 960: 935: 908: 887: 856: 841: 799: 770: 740: 695: 621: 606: 580: 525: 500: 483: 469: 458: 400:

on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join

1490: 1151: 1108:

There now appears to be a good answer to the "what else could it be?" question. This web page:

1073: 879: 837: 791: 766: 1547:

before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template

1563: 966:

Fair enough. I'll try to borrow a copy and integrate the appropriate chapter into the article.

1459:

https://web.archive.org/web/20130615201201/http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/reports/2000/AAR0003.pdf

1178: 1077: 956: 1681: 1354: 1302: 397: 1570: 1472: 1139:'conspiracy theories' so they are not misattributed as being more credible than they are. 820:

2) How did a huge I beam move from the tail section to the forward end of the aircraft.

1251: 1191: 1120: 1085: 931: 617: 192: 173: 989:

about the missile shoot-down theory, that someone editing the article may find useful.

1629: 1529:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by 1462: 1051: 1028: 1017: 967: 904: 1569:

If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with

1718: 1503:

https://web.archive.org/web/20070918041410/http://www.flightsafety.org/ltb_award.html

1147: 875: 833: 787: 762: 737: 692: 603: 522: 480: 455: 952: 948: 519: 510:

Govt's case fades............ as Lahr pounds away in FOIA suit vs. NTSB, CIA et al

1513:

https://web.archive.org/web/20070930022044/http://www.foiac.org/CourtDocuments.htm

157: 133: 1536: 1113: 364: 346: 1535:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than 1247: 1187: 1168: 1081: 927: 613: 393: 370: 163: 1506: 900: 1516: 1109: 866: 1497:

http://www.cnn.com/US/9907/17/twa.flight.800/index.html?eref=sitesearch

761:

Could someone tell me what happened to the section on "Missile theory"

1112:

shows a similar "strange objeect" with tail. If you follow this link:

1483:

http://www.press-enterprise.com/newsarchive/1998/07/17/900658161.html

1228:

the US government (or whoever) conspired to shoot down the plane.

1598:

How is something being hit by a meteorite a "conspiracy theory"?

96: 68: 26: 1076:

attributing the crash to a missile being launched across the

317: 222: 1291:

Calls for a New Investigation by Original NTSB Investigator

545:

but does not reflect or constitue any finding by the court.

1453:

for additional information. I made the following changes:

829:

5) Why did it take one week to recover the black boxes?

1045:

Hey -everyone - I've opened up a can of *sadderz* at the

823:

3) Why were the front landing gear doors blown inward?

392:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the 1473:

http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/reports/2000/AAR0003_App.pdf

1446: 1177:

Agree. The reliable sources say "conspiracy theories."

1119:

Not sure whether this helps or hinders anybody's case.

235:

This article has been checked against the following

1539:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors 1463:

http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/reports/2000/AAR0003.pdf

942:

Missing source that can improve RS for this article

234: 986:There's an interesting programme on YouTube here; 430:This article has not yet received a rating on the 479:dubious source of information, called Knowledge. 520:http://www.scientificblogging.com/applied_reason 1525:This message was posted before February 2018. 862:Ok but I'm not sure I know the difference. 8: 1750:Unknown-importance New York (state) articles 1114:http://asterisk.apod.com/viewtopic.php?t=249 100: 1624:noted there was no evidence of an impact. 1507:http://www.flightsafety.org/ltb_award.html 865:Does this belong in alternative theories? 341: 231: 128: 1441:I have just modified 5 external links on 817:1) Jet A fuel simply does not explode. 179:This article is within the scope of the 18:Talk:TWA Flight 800 alternative theories 1517:http://www.foiac.org/CourtDocuments.htm 1110:http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap041207.html 867:http://www.generalpartin.org/twa800.htm 343: 130: 1730:Start-Class Aviation accident articles 664:But let me do that anyway: (excerpts) 492:Section Titles: using names of people? 410:Knowledge:WikiProject New York (state) 197:. To use this banner, please see the 1745:Start-Class New York (state) articles 1735:Aviation accident task force articles 712:Message from Ray Lahr Rec'd 9/11/2007 413:Template:WikiProject New York (state) 7: 826:4) Why were there so many witness? 386:This article is within the scope of 119:It is of interest to the following 83:on 6 September 2007. The result of 1443:TWA Flight 800 conspiracy theories 57:TWA Flight 800 conspiracy theories 45:TWA Flight 800 conspiracy theories 25: 1445:. Please take a moment to review 1301:, among numerous other stories. 1167:Good idea....I agree completely-- 982:Interesting programme on YouTube 373: 363: 345: 294: 283: 272: 261: 250: 166: 156: 132: 101: 72: 30: 79:This article was nominated for 1134:Rename to Conspiracy Theories? 741:20:40, 14 September 2007 (UTC) 696:20:27, 14 September 2007 (UTC) 607:12:39, 15 September 2007 (UTC) 581:10:34, 14 September 2007 (UTC) 526:23:19, 13 September 2007 (UTC) 207:Knowledge:WikiProject Aviation 1: 1740:WikiProject Aviation articles 1725:Start-Class aviation articles 501:20:58, 8 September 2007 (UTC) 484:13:11, 8 September 2007 (UTC) 470:07:39, 6 September 2007 (UTC) 459:02:26, 6 September 2007 (UTC) 404:and see a list of open tasks. 329:the Aviation accident project 326:This article is supported by 210:Template:WikiProject Aviation 43:for general discussion about 1090:21:43, 17 October 2011 (UTC) 1072:I also remember somebody on 1021:23:59, 23 January 2011 (UTC) 936:07:43, 29 October 2010 (UTC) 622:07:48, 29 October 2010 (UTC) 389:WikiProject New York (state) 1005:19:06, 2 October 2009 (UTC) 961:21:12, 7 October 2008 (UTC) 1766: 1671:14:34, 1 August 2023 (UTC) 1645:09:38, 1 August 2023 (UTC) 1616:01:28, 1 August 2023 (UTC) 1556:(last update: 5 June 2024) 1438:Hello fellow Wikipedians, 1256:13:49, 14 April 2014 (UTC) 1182:11:04, 11 March 2014 (UTC) 1172:19:30, 10 March 2014 (UTC) 1160:15:05, 28 March 2013 (UTC) 1060:04:19, 18 April 2011 (UTC) 1037:17:20, 13 April 2011 (UTC) 976:17:07, 13 April 2011 (UTC) 909:01:07, 2 August 2008 (UTC) 888:14:37, 1 August 2008 (UTC) 857:01:56, 1 August 2008 (UTC) 432:project's importance scale 255:Referencing and citation: 1690:20:38, 22 June 2024 (UTC) 1593:18:55, 17 July 2017 (UTC) 1390:18:54, 21 June 2013 (UTC) 1363:01:54, 20 June 2013 (UTC) 1339:22:47, 19 June 2013 (UTC) 1311:01:55, 20 June 2013 (UTC) 1211:21:39, 9 April 2014 (UTC) 1196:15:08, 7 April 2014 (UTC) 842:19:37, 27 July 2008 (UTC) 771:16:57, 25 July 2008 (UTC) 429: 416:New York (state) articles 358: 325: 151: 127: 1711:08:15, 28 May 2024 (UTC) 1427:06:17, 5 June 2014 (UTC) 1284:14:21, 3 July 2014 (UTC) 800:14:44, 6 June 2014 (UTC) 1434:External links modified 1129:09:27, 2 May 2011 (UTC) 547:(emphasis Judge Matz's) 381:New York (state) portal 266:Coverage and accuracy: 322: 299:Supporting materials: 227: 109:This article is rated 516:LAHR vs. NTSB, et al 321: 226: 1537:regular verification 1047:Bloody Sunday (1972) 182:Aviation WikiProject 47:. Any such comments 1527:After February 2018 681:SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT 288:Grammar and style: 241:for B-class status: 1581:InternetArchiveBot 1532:InternetArchiveBot 1074:Unsolved Mysteries 323: 228: 115:content assessment 42: 1708: 1643: 1557: 1430: 1413:comment added by 1329:comment added by 1274:comment added by 1163: 1146:comment added by 1100:A Vague reference 1078:Long Island Sound 995:comment added by 924:Carl Icahn -: --> 890: 874:comment added by 803: 786:comment added by 498:Strawberry Island 446: 445: 442: 441: 438: 437: 340: 339: 336: 335: 312: 311: 290:criterion not met 268:criterion not met 213:aviation articles 199:full instructions 95: 94: 67: 66: 38: 16:(Redirected from 1757: 1709: 1707: 1633: 1591: 1582: 1555: 1554: 1533: 1494: 1429: 1407: 1341: 1286: 1162: 1140: 1007: 869: 802: 780: 757:"Missile theory" 418: 417: 414: 411: 408: 407:New York (state) 383: 378: 377: 376: 367: 360: 359: 353:New York (state) 349: 342: 302: 298: 297: 291: 287: 286: 280: 276: 275: 269: 265: 264: 258: 254: 253: 232: 215: 214: 211: 208: 205: 176: 171: 170: 169: 160: 153: 152: 147: 136: 129: 112: 106: 105: 97: 76: 69: 34: 33: 27: 21: 1765: 1764: 1760: 1759: 1758: 1756: 1755: 1754: 1715: 1714: 1705:THORNFIELD HALL 1702: 1698: 1663:159.117.189.107 1620:Two rebuttals: 1608:159.117.189.107 1600: 1585: 1580: 1548: 1541:have permission 1531: 1488: 1451:this simple FaQ 1436: 1408: 1404: 1324: 1293: 1269: 1141: 1136: 1102: 1013: 990: 984: 944: 896: 812: 781: 759: 508: 494: 451: 415: 412: 409: 406: 405: 379: 374: 372: 300: 295: 289: 284: 278: 273: 267: 262: 256: 251: 212: 209: 206: 203: 202: 174:Aviation portal 172: 167: 165: 142: 113:on Knowledge's 110: 31: 23: 22: 15: 12: 11: 5: 1763: 1761: 1753: 1752: 1747: 1742: 1737: 1732: 1727: 1717: 1716: 1697: 1694: 1693: 1692: 1676: 1675: 1674: 1673: 1660: 1656: 1653: 1599: 1596: 1575: 1574: 1567: 1520: 1519: 1511:Added archive 1509: 1501:Added archive 1499: 1485: 1477:Added archive 1475: 1467:Added archive 1465: 1457:Added archive 1435: 1432: 1403: 1400: 1399: 1398: 1397: 1396: 1395: 1394: 1393: 1392: 1370: 1369: 1368: 1367: 1366: 1365: 1345: 1344: 1343: 1342: 1320: 1292: 1289: 1288: 1287: 1276:199.248.185.22 1265: 1264: 1263: 1262: 1261: 1260: 1259: 1258: 1236: 1235: 1234: 1233: 1232: 1231: 1230: 1229: 1218: 1217: 1216: 1215: 1214: 1213: 1175: 1135: 1132: 1101: 1098: 1097: 1096: 1095: 1094: 1093: 1092: 1065: 1064: 1063: 1062: 1040: 1039: 1012: 1009: 983: 980: 979: 978: 943: 940: 939: 938: 920: 916: 895: 892: 860: 859: 832: 811: 808: 807: 806: 805: 804: 758: 755: 754: 753: 752: 751: 750: 749: 748: 747: 746: 745: 744: 743: 722: 721: 720: 719: 718: 717: 716: 715: 714: 713: 700: 689: 688: 687: 686: 685: 684: 683: 682: 672: 671: 670: 669: 668: 667: 666: 665: 655: 654: 653: 652: 651: 650: 649: 648: 637: 636: 635: 634: 633: 632: 631: 630: 629: 628: 627: 626: 625: 624: 588: 586: 585: 584: 583: 578:Lipsticked Pig 571: 570: 569: 568: 561: 560: 559: 558: 551: 550: 549: 548: 538: 537: 536: 535: 507: 504: 493: 490: 489: 488: 487: 486: 473: 472: 467:Lipsticked Pig 450: 447: 444: 443: 440: 439: 436: 435: 428: 422: 421: 419: 402:the discussion 385: 384: 368: 356: 355: 350: 338: 337: 334: 333: 324: 314: 313: 310: 309: 307: 305: 304: 303: 292: 281: 270: 259: 245: 244: 242: 229: 219: 218: 216: 178: 177: 161: 149: 148: 137: 125: 124: 118: 107: 93: 92: 85:the discussion 77: 65: 64: 61:Reference desk 49:may be removed 35: 24: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 1762: 1751: 1748: 1746: 1743: 1741: 1738: 1736: 1733: 1731: 1728: 1726: 1723: 1722: 1720: 1713: 1712: 1706: 1695: 1691: 1687: 1683: 1678: 1677: 1672: 1668: 1664: 1661: 1657: 1654: 1651: 1650: 1649: 1648: 1647: 1646: 1641: 1637: 1632: 1631: 1625: 1621: 1618: 1617: 1613: 1609: 1604: 1597: 1595: 1594: 1589: 1584: 1583: 1572: 1568: 1565: 1561: 1560: 1559: 1552: 1546: 1542: 1538: 1534: 1528: 1523: 1518: 1514: 1510: 1508: 1504: 1500: 1498: 1492: 1486: 1484: 1480: 1476: 1474: 1470: 1466: 1464: 1460: 1456: 1455: 1454: 1452: 1448: 1444: 1439: 1433: 1431: 1428: 1424: 1420: 1416: 1412: 1402:Radar section 1401: 1391: 1387: 1383: 1382:76.254.55.239 1378: 1377: 1376: 1375: 1374: 1373: 1372: 1371: 1364: 1360: 1356: 1351: 1350: 1349: 1348: 1347: 1346: 1340: 1336: 1332: 1331:64.134.229.51 1328: 1321: 1317: 1316: 1315: 1314: 1313: 1312: 1308: 1304: 1300: 1299: 1290: 1285: 1281: 1277: 1273: 1267: 1266: 1257: 1253: 1249: 1244: 1243: 1242: 1241: 1240: 1239: 1238: 1237: 1226: 1225: 1224: 1223: 1222: 1221: 1220: 1219: 1212: 1208: 1204: 1199: 1198: 1197: 1193: 1189: 1185: 1184: 1183: 1180: 1176: 1173: 1170: 1166: 1165: 1164: 1161: 1157: 1153: 1149: 1145: 1133: 1131: 1130: 1126: 1122: 1117: 1115: 1111: 1106: 1099: 1091: 1087: 1083: 1079: 1075: 1071: 1070: 1069: 1068: 1067: 1066: 1061: 1057: 1053: 1048: 1044: 1043: 1042: 1041: 1038: 1034: 1030: 1025: 1024: 1023: 1022: 1019: 1011:James Sanders 1010: 1008: 1006: 1002: 998: 997:213.40.254.27 994: 988: 981: 977: 973: 969: 965: 964: 963: 962: 958: 954: 950: 941: 937: 933: 929: 921: 917: 913: 912: 911: 910: 906: 902: 893: 891: 889: 885: 881: 877: 873: 868: 863: 858: 854: 850: 846: 845: 844: 843: 839: 835: 830: 827: 824: 821: 818: 815: 809: 801: 797: 793: 789: 785: 777: 776: 775: 774: 773: 772: 768: 764: 756: 742: 739: 734: 733: 732: 731: 730: 729: 728: 727: 726: 725: 724: 723: 711: 710: 709: 708: 707: 706: 705: 704: 703: 702: 701: 698: 697: 694: 680: 679: 678: 677: 676: 675: 674: 673: 663: 662: 661: 660: 659: 658: 657: 656: 645: 644: 643: 642: 641: 640: 639: 638: 623: 619: 615: 610: 609: 608: 605: 601: 600: 599: 598: 597: 596: 595: 594: 593: 592: 591: 590: 589: 582: 579: 575: 574: 573: 572: 565: 564: 563: 562: 555: 554: 553: 552: 546: 542: 541: 540: 539: 532: 531: 530: 529: 528: 527: 524: 521: 517: 514: 511: 505: 503: 502: 499: 491: 485: 482: 477: 476: 475: 474: 471: 468: 463: 462: 461: 460: 457: 449:IAMAW section 448: 433: 427: 424: 423: 420: 403: 399: 395: 391: 390: 382: 371: 369: 366: 362: 361: 357: 354: 351: 348: 344: 331: 330: 320: 316: 315: 308: 306: 301:criterion met 293: 282: 279:criterion met 271: 260: 257:criterion met 249: 248: 247: 246: 243: 240: 239: 233: 230: 225: 221: 220: 217: 200: 196: 195: 190: 189: 184: 183: 175: 164: 162: 159: 155: 154: 150: 146: 141: 138: 135: 131: 126: 122: 116: 108: 104: 99: 98: 90: 86: 82: 78: 75: 71: 70: 62: 58: 54: 50: 46: 41: 37:This page is 36: 29: 28: 19: 1699: 1628: 1626: 1622: 1619: 1605: 1601: 1579: 1576: 1551:source check 1530: 1524: 1521: 1440: 1437: 1409:— Preceding 1405: 1325:— Preceding 1296: 1294: 1270:— Preceding 1203:Salon Essahj 1179:Tom Harrison 1142:— Preceding 1137: 1118: 1107: 1103: 1014: 985: 945: 897: 864: 861: 831: 828: 825: 822: 819: 816: 813: 782:— Preceding 760: 699: 690: 587: 544: 518: 515: 512: 509: 495: 452: 387: 327: 236: 193: 187: 181: 121:WikiProjects 88: 1682:Flight Risk 1355:GreenIn2010 1303:GreenIn2010 991:—Preceding 870:—Preceding 810:5 questions 277:Structure: 194:task forces 111:Start-class 40:not a forum 1719:Categories 1588:Report bug 1174:completely 1121:Old_Wombat 925:TWA -: --> 394:U.S. state 188:open tasks 53:refactored 1696:Shootdown 1630:BillHPike 1571:this tool 1564:this tool 1491:dead link 1415:Airion101 1052:LoveUxoxo 1029:LoveUxoxo 968:LoveUxoxo 915:theories. 145:Accidents 1640:contribs 1577:Cheers.— 1423:contribs 1411:unsigned 1327:unsigned 1272:unsigned 1156:contribs 1148:Tomwood0 1144:unsigned 993:unsigned 884:contribs 876:Arydberg 872:unsigned 834:Arydberg 796:contribs 788:Mvdc1980 784:unsigned 763:Arydberg 738:Author51 693:Author51 604:Author51 523:Author51 481:Author51 456:Author51 398:New York 238:criteria 204:Aviation 140:Aviation 81:deletion 1495:tag to 1447:my edit 953:MaxPont 576:duh... 59:at the 1659:this). 1487:Added 117:scale. 1248:FOARP 1188:FOARP 1169:MONGO 1082:DanTD 949:WP:RS 928:Stian 647:Wiki. 614:Stian 1686:talk 1667:talk 1636:talk 1612:talk 1419:talk 1386:talk 1359:talk 1335:talk 1307:talk 1298:this 1280:talk 1252:talk 1207:talk 1192:talk 1152:talk 1125:talk 1086:talk 1056:talk 1033:talk 1018:Wi2g 1001:talk 972:talk 957:talk 932:talk 905:talk 901:Ronz 880:talk 853:talk 838:talk 792:talk 767:talk 618:talk 506:News 191:and 89:keep 87:was 1545:RfC 1515:to 1505:to 1481:to 1471:to 1461:to 923:--> 894:POV 849:RxS 426:??? 396:of 51:or 1721:: 1703:— 1688:) 1669:) 1638:, 1614:) 1558:. 1553:}} 1549:{{ 1493:}} 1489:{{ 1425:) 1421:• 1388:) 1361:) 1337:) 1309:) 1282:) 1254:) 1209:) 1194:) 1158:) 1154:• 1127:) 1088:) 1058:) 1035:) 1003:) 974:) 959:) 934:) 907:) 899:-- 886:) 882:• 855:) 840:) 798:) 794:• 769:) 620:) 143:: 1684:( 1665:( 1642:) 1634:( 1610:( 1590:) 1586:( 1573:. 1566:. 1417:( 1384:( 1357:( 1333:( 1305:( 1278:( 1250:( 1205:( 1190:( 1150:( 1123:( 1084:( 1054:( 1031:( 999:( 970:( 955:( 930:( 903:( 878:( 851:( 836:( 790:( 765:( 616:( 434:. 332:. 201:. 123:: 91:. 63:. 20:)

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Index