Holdontoyourhat said:
OK, well I'm not a big 'enhanced 911 tape' expert. It seems 'Dave's analysis' is opposite the 'aerospace analysis.' That just means experts can't agree. Just like experts can't agree on so many other aspects.
When experts can't agree on the tape, its harder to make the tape part of an argument for the R's lying about BR.
Since there is nothing on the 911 tape, or even the enhanced 911 tape, that clearly indicated BR was there, I'd go with the R's statements relating to BR. Unless there was some other reason to discount it.
You seem to be suggesting that Dave is an expert - when in fact we only have Dave's word for that. In reality, we don't know anything about Dave. He *seems* to be an expert on a lot of things when in fact we know that defies the very definition of the word expert (Jack of all trades is usually master of none).
Don't you find it compelling that having "analysed" the tape using a mystery program he wrote himself, Dave then refused to discuss his analysis with anyone who hadn't performed the same analysis?
I was in contact with a REAL forensic audio analyst a couple of years ago - a man who is highly respected and well known in his field. He explained to me the process of spectrography and how a computer can detect sounds which are inaudible to the human ear. Very powerful equipment is used for this - equipment which an organisation like Aerospace might have but which in fact the FBI and Secret Service do NOT own! (their equipment is notoriously NOT state of the art).
My expert laughed at the notion of a trained ear being sufficient for forensic audion analysis.
A few weeks ago, I started this thread:-
http://websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=33913
I used my graphics software (Paint Shop Pro) to write a message on a blank canvas. The message was written in white and on a white background - however, they were different shades of white. At a setting of 24 bit colour depth, a computer can distinguish between over 16 million colours - a human eye cannot distinguish between 16 million colours - not even close.
Same with audio. With a sampling resolution of 24 bits, a computer can store over 16 millions different sounds and distinguish between them. Not even a specially trained human ear can distinguish between over 16 million sounds!
I think it is very dangerous to make assumptions based upon the results of amateur tests performed on inadequate equipment using a ???? generational copy of a recording. Every time a copy is made, the sound quality deteriorates. If the original had to be enhanced by Aeropsace to make sense of it - we cannot possibly make judgements upon Dave's table-top analysis (figure of speech).
The FACT is that none of us have heard Aerospace's enahncement of the original 911 tape. We do know that Aerospace made a statement to say that they "stand by their work". We also know that another company (el Paso?) who analysed the ORIGINAL tape claimed also to hear the voices - they just didn't agree with Aerospace on the words which were spoken.
So back to my message on this thread:-
http://websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=33913
Look at the image - you will see nothing but it is there. A computer can see it, a human cannot.