• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Surprise - PsiTech remote viewers were wrong

RichardR

Master Poster
Joined
Nov 21, 2001
Messages
2,274
Remember the crash of Flight 587, in New York in 2001? According to the remote viewing geniuses at PsiTech (the same people who told police where to look for Elizabeth Smart's dead body), this crash was caused by:

…a series of explosions caused by an intentionally damaged fuel injection pump. During take-off procedures, the engines of a jet aircraft are operated at full throttle. The fuel boost pump on Flight 587 was tampered with so that during take-off, the extreme vibration would create a rupture and a fuel spill that would cause the engine to explode. Massive fuel spilled into the engines while at full throttle. The left engine exploded breaking off from the wing and hitting the tail section shearing it off and causing the plane to spiral into the ground.

The most disturbing aspects of the data suggests "mechanical infiltration". The aircraft was tampered with by someone with sufficient mechanical knowledge knowing the specific stress caused by the vibration during take-off would result in rupturing the fuel pump system causing a fuel spill and resulting explosion.

Strangely, a report from the National Transportation Safety Board (see CNN today) reported today that:

The co-pilot of American Airlines Flight 587 caused the November 2001 crash in Queens, New York, that claimed the lives of 265 people, the staff of the nation's airline safety agency reported Tuesday.

Investigator Robert Benzon of the National Transportation Safety Board staff said the copilot's response to turbulence, just seconds after the Airbus A300-600 plane took off from New York's John F. Kennedy International Airport, was "unnecessary and aggressive."
How could PsiTech have ruined their perfect record and got it so wrong?
 
That's typical of the National Transportation Safety Board and their media puppets to try and cover up the REAL cause (as correctly described by PsiTech).

PsiTech are right!
PsiTech are genuine!
PsiTech are NOT lunatics/frauds/incompetents/morons/liars/misguided/gullible or charletans. I know this because they say so.
 
It's all a cover up by the NTSB in order to protect GWB. It WAS a deliberate tampering perpetrated by Islamic terrorists but in order to maintain the view that GWB is effective against terrorism it is being ignored.
 
a series of explosions caused by an intentionally damaged fuel injection pump.

The most disturbing aspects of the data suggests "mechanical infiltration". The aircraft was tampered with by someone with sufficient mechanical knowledge knowing the specific stress caused by the vibration during take-off would result in rupturing the fuel pump system causing a fuel spill and resulting explosion.
Of all the stupid ass ways to bring down a plane, installing a faulty fuel pump has got to be one of the most ridiculous. Like you can just stroll over and throw in a doctored fuel pump when nobody is watching... like it's a '78 Ford Pinto.

And what would be the point? To make it look like an accident?

Terrorists who don't want to tarnish their image with bad PR?

:rolleyes:
 
Ashles said:
That's typical of the National Transportation Safety Board and their media puppets to try and cover up the REAL cause (as correctly described by PsiTech).

PsiTech are right!
PsiTech are genuine!
PsiTech are NOT lunatics/frauds/incompetents/morons/liars/misguided/gullible or charletans. I know this because they say so.

...and because they drive Volvos and favor Earth-tone clothing.
 
See, now you know what bothers me about this?

Not that the "psychics" will still claim to be right, or will ignore it, or somehow twist it to their benefit.

What bothers me is that there are people out there--functioning human beings--who honestly believe that the psychics' "visions" should be taken more seriously than the investigation that went out and looked at the physical evidence.
 
I sent this to Joni Dourif, President of PSI TECH, Inc. and the Director of TRV training:

================================================
jonidourif@psitech.net

Dear Ms. Dourif,

I read with interest about PSI-TECH's preliminary report about the crash of American Airlines Flight 587, posted on November 12, 2001.

Allow me to quote the report:

"The cause of the crash was a series of explosions caused by an intentionally damaged fuel injection pump. During take-off procedures, the engines of a jet aircraft are operated at full throttle. The fuel boost pump on Flight 587 was tampered with so that during take-off, the extreme vibration would create a rupture and a fuel spill that would cause the engine to explode. Massive fuel spilled into the engines while at full throttle. The left engine exploded breaking off from the wing and hitting the tail section shearing it off and causing the plane to spiral into the ground.

The most disturbing aspects of the data suggests "mechanical infiltration". The aircraft was tampered with by someone with sufficient mechanical knowledge knowing the specific stress caused by the vibration during take-off would result in rupturing the fuel pump system causing a fuel spill and resulting explosion."

Source: http://www.remoteviewing.com/remote-viewing-projects/american-airlines-flight-587/index.html

Today, CNN reported that the National Transportation Safety Board found that it was a co-pilot error:

"The co-pilot of American Airlines Flight 587 caused the November 2001 crash in Queens, New York, that claimed the lives of 265 people, the staff of the nation's airline safety agency reported Tuesday.

Investigator Robert Benzon of the National Transportation Safety Board staff said the copilot's response to turbulence, just seconds after the Airbus A300-600 plane took off from New York's John F. Kennedy International Airport, was "unnecessary and aggressive."

Source: http://edition.cnn.com/2004/US/10/26/ntsb.flight587.ap/index.html

I was living in New York at the time, and both the events on 9-11 and this crash were, as I am sure you understand, very traumatic to people there.

I would therefore like to ask you if you intend to:

1) Retract the report with an explanation of why the predictions went wrong.

2) Issue a formal apology to the families of the victims of the crash for predicting something that did not come true.

3) Publish a complete list of predictions made by PSI-TECH, stating which came true and which did not come true, so we can know exactly how successful your company is at predicting things.

I look forward to your reply.

Sincerely,

Claus Larsen
Editor
SkepticReport.com
================================================
 
I predict that they will send you a response, but before you can read it a terrorist will soon sneak into your house and tamper with your email account only deleting that particular message to further cover-up the truth that he installed a faulty fuel pump.
 
Chemical_Penguin said:
I predict that they will send you a response, but before you can read it a terrorist will soon sneak into your house and tamper with your email account only deleting that particular message to further cover-up the truth that he installed a faulty fuel pump.

................no. :)
 
CFLarsen said:
Sure. But you don't win anything. It's a given... :)


Blast! :D

hehe.,..yeah, I guess it isnt much of a 'prediction' when we all know what is going to happen!
 
Claus:

LOL – good luck. These are the people who managed to carry on after Elizabeth Smart was found alive (following months of complaining that the authorities wouldn't search the area where they said her dead body was). I emailed them about that and what they said was:

This is is (sic) the first time we have been wrong about "dead or alive". The mistake was made in the analysis of the data not the data itself. This is still a young technology and the analysis of the data is even younger. So, people can wait another twenty years until we prefect it or they can be pioneer's to help perfect it but be cautious because pioneers need backbones. It doesn't make this technology any less valid - it only makes we, human beings fallible but we knew that already.
(I guess the "is is" was to emphasize that it really was the first time.)

Their explanation was (paraphrasing), "the technology works but we misunderstood what we were seeing". Can you say "unfalsifiable"? Eventually they removed it from their website, as I am sure they will with this if enough people write to them.

You'll probably find you're signed up for their weekly newsletter now though. I was until I unsubscribed. (The comedic value diminished after a month or two.)
 
RichardR said:
Claus:

LOL – good luck.

Hey, it's worth a shot! :)

RichardR said:
These are the people who managed to carry on after Elizabeth Smart was found alive (following months of complaining that the authorities wouldn't search the area where they said her dead body was). I emailed them about that and what they said was:

(I guess the "is is" was to emphasize that it really was the first time.)

Not to speak of the other typos....

RichardR said:
Their explanation was (paraphrasing), "the technology works but we misunderstood what we were seeing". Can you say "unfalsifiable"? Eventually they removed it from their website, as I am sure they will with this if enough people write to them.

Not to worry. I just archived their whole site... ;)

RichardR said:
You'll probably find you're signed up for their weekly newsletter now though. I was until I unsubscribed. (The comedic value diminished after a month or two.)

If they do, I'll report them for spamming.
 
Oh sure, there may be a few glitches with the "technology" when it comes to such piddling concerns as airplane disasters, and missing persons, but when it really counts, when the Psitech team takes on the big problems, when the pressure is really on, that's when RV really shines...

http://www.psitech.net/news/tsl_091202.htm

Mystery Of The Lost Kitty
 

Back
Top Bottom