CIT/Air America Debate Challenge

eeyore1954 said:
Did any one call in and mention how ridiculous it is to believe the broken light poles were planted on the busy highway.
Click to expand...

The show was very rushed IMHO due to having to make room for all of the commercials about tax law.
Add to that the fact the he had so many guests so that issue was not addressed.
Green did make a comment about how he may do this again so maybe CIT can have a slot of their own.
It would be nice to also hear people call in and see how many supporters they get.
I have a feeling though that Aldo will ruin any chance they have at getting on again.
 
Last edited:
We really should be harping more on the fearless DRG's brave method of spouting his nonsense then saying "oh I have to go" before Ron got to respond in what was supposed to be a debate.

What a douche.
 
Yes that was classic. He was asked what happened to the passengers of flight 77 then says "oh gotta go" but then has time to change the subject and also pimp his book for the 100th time.
 
theauthor said:
Who mentions measured? Moving goalposts much?

He says the hole was reported at 16 - 20 feet then agrees with that assessment by saying it is what you would expect and the fuselage punched the hole.
Click to expand...


As an author. You are not very good at reading are you? lemme guess. childrens books?

Originally Posted by T.A.M.
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:)
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
16.5 said:
/These guys are grossly incompetent. They have cherry picked themselves into a story that has perhaps surpassed the No Planers in idiocy.
Click to expand...

Yep, about the time I think it can't get more stupid it surpasses my wildest expectations!
 
Their other south parking lot witness Levi Stephens does not mention a flyover

his location is at "A" in this photo
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a327/lytetrip/Pentagon/Pentagon folder 2/LevisPosition.jpg

"A... is about right on the mark. Notice it's a one way street that allows you to circle South parking. I was looking for a parking spot. So as the plane flew in I had to physically turn around to watch it. I stopped there when I noticed how low the plane was. The reporter sort of misquoted me I was actually driving away from the Pentagon directionally as I wasn't facing the building."
Click to expand...
 
A W Smith said:
Their other south parking lot witness Levi Stephens does not mention a flyover
Click to expand...

Yep, I don't think that they realize that the more witnesses they try to shoehorn into their little fantasy, the more they contradict themselves.
 
:rolleyes:
theauthor said:
No, TAM asked for a debunker who admits the hole is 16 feet. Nobody can measure the size because the hole doesn't exist anymore. I provided what TAM asked for.
Click to expand...

This is as far as I got in this odd exchange.
Forgive me if this has been addressed in the last page after author's post.

The fact of the matter is that the ground floor wall was missing for 90-100 feet which is consistent with the wings hitting it while the round hole at the second floor level is consistent with the diameter of the fuselage AND consistent with where such a hole created by the fuselage would be if a 757 hit the Pentagon with its wings just below the ceiling height of the ground floor.

Ct's who carry on about 'its only a 15-20 foot hole but the plane was 100 feet wide' are being horrendously and obviously dishonest.
 
I see that Col. George Nelson repeated the oft-debunked canard that the plane punched through three rings of the Pentagon. Many "Truthers" still believe this to be true; Jason Bermas repeated the claim when I debated him on Rob Bishop's show.

In fact, on the first two floors of the Pentagon, rings E, D and C are all connected. This is pretty easy to see here:

http://www.geoffmetcalf.com/pentagon/images/17.jpg

Click on the photo to supersize it, and you'll see that the middle section of the building in the picture (the D ring) only has three floors of windows shown. However the left section of the building in the picture (the C ring) has four sets of windows and it is clear that there is a floor below that as well. Since the Pentagon is a five-story building on all rings, that means that there are two floors of the D ring that we cannot see because it is interconnected with the C ring.

Incidentally I was definitely feeling a twinge of regret about not appearing on the show when I found out that Griffin showed up, but to nobody's surprise he took no questions. Has this guy ever faced questions from debunkers on a radio show?
 
Brainster said:
Incidentally I was definitely feeling a twinge of regret about not appearing on the show when I found out that Griffin showed up, but to nobody's surprise he took no questions. Has this guy ever faced questions from debunkers on a radio show?
Click to expand...

Folks have often wondered how his theological training prepares him for 9/11 research. I think we have the answer - he's learned the best debate position is from God's perspective. The author of six books and above-it-all uber-expert Griffin will not be taking your questions although he will accept your prayers at any time.

And DRG - no, dummy, citing Aldo's 'analysis' where he wrote 'dubious' or 'unverified' next to every other account does NOT defuse the eyewitness record.
 
pomeroo said:
You might try taking a look at the Pentagon Building Report.
Click to expand...

Where in the Pentagon Building Performance Report(PBPR) does it say that the hole in the E-ring of the Pentagon is 90 feet across?

Caustic Logic said:
Sorry I missed the sub-debate, but they're right. The hole was 90 feet-plus, walls, columns removed the whole way. Panels gone but columns left for an even wider area. Have you even seen the ground floor? Many people got confused and mean the smaller portion of damage on the second floor. A LOT of people pretend that's THE damage, for some reason...
http://frustratingfraud.blogspot.com/2007/01/obscured-by-foam.html
Even Craig and CIT know not to argue 16-foot hole, as Greene knows and calls him in between eick and Neson, capt. of the Pod People.
Click to expand...


Hello Adam Larson (AKA Caustic Logic). I've read your blog on and off for quite a while now. Why the obsession with Flight 77? It seems like there are other topics that are far more interesting regarding 9/11. Blogger Arabesque devotes some of his writings to Pentagon attack, but he covers a much wider spectrum.

You write, "The hole was 90 feet-plus, walls, columns removed the whole way. Panels gone but columns left for an even wider area."

Where does it say this in the PBPR? The PBPR report states, "A second photograph (figure 3.9) taken before the collapse reveals that first-floor exterior columns on column lines 15, 16, and 17 were severely distorted but still attached at least at their top ends to the second-floor framing."

According to the report, the impact of the fuselage occurred at column line 14. So how can the hole extend 90 feet across if the column lines just to the right of where the fuselage impacted the facade are still connected?

When you say the hole was 90 feet across are you referring to an actual hole, or just the area of column damage and distortion?
 
pomeroo said:
The following message is from Rob Balsamo. I haven't listened to the off-air commotion yet.

(RB wrote)
Attached is the file. 11mins runtime.

I edited out on air dicussion except for the last segment. We only got the second hour off air chats as i said i didnt think of it until second hour. Feel free to post it on your websites.

We posted it here..
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index.php?s=&showtopic=12450&view=findpost&p=10740626
Click to expand...


It says you need to be a member.
 
Tanabear,
What is the obsession you share with some of your peers where you state someones name?
BTW CL you have a PM.
 
Tanabear, maybe you should read the whole paper?

"Along the path of the movement of aircraft debris through the building,the most severe damage was confined to a region that can be represented approximately by a triangle centered on the trajectory of the aircraft in plan,with a base width at the aircraft entry point of approximately 90 ft and a length along the aircraft path of approximately 230 ft (figure 6.6). damage for 60 ft to the north of the collapse area,especially along a strip bounded approximately by column lines B and C. "
 
Man now I can appreciate more and more why the truthers are abandoning the CIT.
First you have Aldo with his hissyfit over how it went on Clout and now Craig's paranoia is surfacing:
http://s1.zetaboards.com/LooseChangeForums/single/?p=72968&t=277689
For some reason the link to the segment with my presentation isn't functional.

Go figure.

The groundbreaking new evidence isn't available.
Click to expand...
straight jacket time!
BTW Craig your "eyewitness" claims are exactly that they are CLAIMS they ARE NOT EVIDENCE. You and the rest of the CIT look FOOLISH everytime you mix it up.
 
Last edited:
tanabear said:
When you say the hole was 90 feet across are you referring to an actual hole, or just the area of column damage and distortion?
Click to expand...

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hole

Are you ****ING serious?

the "actual" hole? I think he is referring to the section of the outside wall that was removed by the jet plane. you know, the 75-90 foot section along the bottom floor, combined with the smaller 12-16 foot section above...is it a cavern that goes in 50 feet in all areas, NO, but I think most SANE people would agree that the 75-90 foot section of damage to the bottom floor would qualify as a "hole"...an "actual" one.


Here, for your reading pleasure...

http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/analysis/conclusions/composite.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/photos/index.html#precollapse
http://911review.com/articles/stjarna/eximpactdamage.html

TAM:)
 
Wow what do you so to crapola like this
the majority of the people who got involved in this movement did so because of their interest in the pentagon. this aspect of the attack has always been the most suspicious to everyone because the notion you could attack the hq of the mightiest military in the world 90 minutes after war was declared is unbelievable.

then you see cameras were mounted directly above the alleged impact spot and the duh-bunkers claimed the pentagon didnt archive any of its security film unlike every corporation in the united states has been doing for the last 15-20 years is also a joke. the footage exists. but it'll never be release because of what it doesn't show.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom