CIT/Air America Debate Challenge

Excuse me, please. Could someone tell me the name of CIT's flyover witness? I missed it in the thread.
 
Almost seven years after 911.

Several weeks after CIT dropped their flyover claim.

A month or so after they admitted their errors on the flight path.

Now they found a flyover witness?

And he was in the South Parking Lot?

facepalm
 
Hey guys... I just got back from travel, and it looks like I landed in a war zone!

I don't suppose the "Citizens' Investigation Team" ever bothered to respond to their erroneous 11.2 G press release? The one that I corrected two months ago, Mr. Balsamo claimed I was lying about, and then promised to reply?

Also, am I wrong about this, or would a south parking lot flyover require the aircraft to have literally turned on a dime over the Pentagon while they were busy blowing it up, not to mention the fact that there were numerous others in the same parking lot who didn't see any such thing..? Never mind, that's too stupid to require a response. Carry on.
 
Guys, please, I'm begging you. What's the name of the flyover witness?

Is it by any chance Stephenson?
 
R.Mackey said:
I don't suppose the "Citizens' Investigation Team" ever bothered to respond to their erroneous 11.2 G press release? The one that I corrected two months ago, Mr. Balsamo claimed I was lying about, and then promised to reply?
.
Click to expand...
No joy on the 11.2 G special math; you can't even get them to say anything. But then again, they are selling this junk 15 bucks a DVD.

Ron plugged your paper by name.
 
Last edited:
R.Mackey said:
Hey guys... I just got back from travel, and it looks like I landed in a war zone!

I don't suppose the "Citizens' Investigation Team" ever bothered to respond to their erroneous 11.2 G press release? The one that I corrected two months ago, Mr. Balsamo claimed I was lying about, and then promised to reply?

Also, am I wrong about this, or would a south parking lot flyover require the aircraft to have literally turned on a dime over the Pentagon while they were busy blowing it up, not to mention the fact that there were numerous others in the same parking lot who didn't see any such thing..? Never mind, that's too stupid to require a response. Carry on.
Click to expand...

The CIT really didnt get much time.
There was a lot of tax commercials though FWIW.
DRG amd Barb seemed to get the most time and Ron got a lot too I think.
 
theauthor said:
Even debunkers admit that the hole was only 16ft across. They then go on to say that the wings folded back and entered that hole with the fuselage. why would anyone pretend that the hole was 90ft. FGS the section that collapsed was only 75 feet across..
Click to expand...

Please show me a posting by a "debunker" that admits that the hole made by AA77 was 16 feet across? (oh, and a post stating that the portion of the hole on the second floor is 16 feet across doesn't count...it must admit that the entire hole is 16 feet across).

I'll go run around the world a dozen times while I am waiting.

TAM:)
 
DidntSeeFlyover.png


http://s1.zetaboards.com/LooseChangeForums/single/?p=48659&t=141696
 
Bobert said:
LOL pooor widdle Aldo
http://s1.zetaboards.com/LooseChangeForums/single/?p=72578&t=277689
Click to expand...

That is amazing. First they complain that we're all too cowardly, despite refusing to answer even on forums they regularly post on, instead finding the safe haven of a friendly radio programme and only issuing what, 48 hours notice? Then, when someone actually shows up, they bitch about being "drowned out?"

Seems to me somebody is a wee bit too sensitive for this gig.

pomeroo said:
Well, I tried!
Click to expand...

Nice job, Ron. I doubt I would have called in myself, but after reading both arguments pro and con, I guess I don't see the harm. Generally one will be wasting one's time given the uneven playing field, but these kinds of radio shows are, after all, just entertainment. I see no problem with talking.

If these nuts try pushing pseudoscience in a real conference or journal or even newspaper (excluding the typical errant "letter to the editor," of course), on the other hand -- communications that actually have integrity instead of the open airwaves -- that's different. Those demand the A-game from all of us. Not that they'll ever step up, mind you.

beachnut said:
No joy on the 11.2 G special math; you can't even get them to say anything. But then again, they are selling this junk 15 bucks a DVD.

Ron plugged your paper by name.
Click to expand...

Pity, that would have been amusing.

Regarding my whitepaper, that reminds me that I have a revision to finish. I owe Craig Furlong those corrections. Hope to have it done by Sunday night.
 
yes another "scoop of the century" that they will claim to "bring to authorities", then when it appears nowhere but their little sites, they will claim "The Man is suppressing the evidence".

Give me a break. Haven't the "mainstream" truthers shut these twirps up yet? they are almost as bad as the "No Planers".

TAM:)
 
Oh, no. Stephenson is an ATC and he saw the plane hit the Pentagon from Reagan. Their guy is in the south parking lot, right?

Ah, well. That would have been rich.
 
R.Mackey said:
Also, am I wrong about this, or would a south parking lot flyover require the aircraft to have literally turned on a dime over the Pentagon while they were busy blowing it up, not to mention the fact that there were numerous others in the same parking lot who didn't see any such thing..? Never mind, that's too stupid to require a response. Carry on.
Click to expand...
Yes, they are actually now claiming that the plane did a hairpin turn entirely over the Pentagon.

Just when you thought it couldn't get any more stupid!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom