• 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.

Merged Lloyd England: Eye of the Storm

Turbofan said:
See-saw? The interior the car is maybe 6 feet from dash to rear seat.

How long and heavy is that light pole? :eek:
Click to expand...

So you're proposing a 3-500 pound light pole should flip a 2,000 pound car had it landed in the position which it was photographed?
 
16.5 said:
Now I agree that none of your NOC witnesses say that the plane pulled out of the descent!! (giggle) they all said the plane hit the Pentagon (Bwhahahahaha!!!!) Can a brother get a laughing dog! (cripes, these CIT fans just keep teeing them up, and we just keep knocking them out of the Park!)
Click to expand...

Yup, they did. So your momma knocked down the light poles then?

Ummm...can I get a laughing dog now? Perhaps a homer out of the park too? :rolleyes:

Typical GL bs. You guys don't put all the pieces together.
 
Keep it civil, and on topic, please. It's about Lloyd England and his testimony.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: chillzero
 
Grizzly Bear said:
So you're proposing a 3-500 pound light pole should flip a 2,000 pound car had it landed in the position which it was photographed?
Click to expand...

Flip the car? 2,000 lbs.?

First off, get your weights in check.

Second, look at the damage to the car.

Third, figure out the direction of force on the light pole vs. the direction
of traffic.

Please explain how the pole enters the windshield from those angles, and
sticks out suspended in mid air with 30+ feet sticking out of the car. :big:
 
Turbofan said:
Flip the car? 2,000 lbs.?

First off, get your weights in check.

Second, look at the damage to the car.

Third, figure out the direction of force on the light pole vs. the direction
of traffic.

Please explain how the pole enters the windshield from those angles, and
sticks out suspended in mid air with 30+ feet sticking out of the car. :big:
Click to expand...



Your argument is nothing more than incredulity.

I've offered you substance.

In return, you dodge and mock.

Provide calculations showing the flightpath (to quote 16.5: "descent over the annex, bank North of CITGO, pull out of the descent, pull out of the bank , and pull up and over the impact site at the Pentagon!") is physically possible.

It's fairly simple calculations. Determine the radius of turn and speed of each maneuver, calculate the g-loading.

The flightpath quoted above is what CIT claims, even if they've never actually strung all the individual components they come up with together into a complete scenario.

Give me calculations, and I show the physics behind Lloyd's flight pole, which, according to you and CIT, will prove him to be not just mistaken about his position that day, but an outright liar.
 
[X] said:
Give me calculations, and I show the physics behind Lloyd's flight pole, which, according to you and CIT, will prove him to be not just mistaken about his position that day, but an outright liar.
Click to expand...

Here's your calculation:

Pilot moves the yoke.

Plane turns and goes north of Citgo.

As the plane approaches the Pentagon, the pilot pulls back on the yoke
and the plane goes up and over the Pentagon.
 
Turbofan said:
Not quite denialboy.

If you would have watched the video like any responsible researcher would do,
you would have seen that the CIT morons showed Lloyd several photos of himself and the
cab.

Lloyd acknowledges the photos, but then denies he was ever there. :eek:

You all continue to attack the CIT morons instead of taking in the message from the video.

Caustic, that's some pretty strong leather to hold up a street lamp.
Unbelievable excuses here.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...


In other words, an elderly man is a little confused, probably due to the way the CIT morons were interviewing him, about this event which happened seven years ago. Therefore, 9/11 was an inside job.

Also, the damage to the cab seems a little weird to you and the CIT morons. Therefore, 9/11 was an inside job.

PS: Please refrain from changing what is said in my quotes and I will do the same.
 
Turbofan said:
Here's your calculation:

Pilot moves the yoke.

Plane turns and goes north of Citgo.

As the plane approaches the Pentagon, the pilot pulls back on the yoke
and the plane goes up and over the Pentagon.
Click to expand...


Wonderful.
You know how a plane is controlled.

Now show the calculations showing that the maneuvers proposed by CIT are physically possible.

I've already told you how to do it.

Just saying it happens is not proof. It's like saying the Hockey-stick flightpath is possile because the pilot can pull back on the stick.
It completely ignores aerodynamics, wing loading, physics, and momentum.
 
Turbofan said:
There are no resonable tears in the seats to suspend a pole of that size
in mid air.
Click to expand...
Get your physics straight. If there were tears that would mean the pole slipped. If the pole slipped that would mean you don't understand physics or logic. IOW, you have been "deceived" by the cowardly idiots of CIT.
 
Turbofan said:
What calculations? Based on WHAT? We have witness accounts of a north
approach. We have photos showing the damage to the Pentagon wall is
inconsistent with a 757.

We have LLoyd going back on his word. What more do you need to indicate
a government cover-up?

Here is the photo. How does the plane magically pass through the windows
and wall?

Note: this is linked from my FTP. I scaled the images.

[qimg]http://procision-auto.com/911/PFT_entry_hole.jpg[/qimg]
Click to expand...



Why do you ingore most of my posts?

I explained what the calculations should be based on.


Right now, all you have is incredulity.
You don't think it's possible, therefore you conclude inside job.


Stop dodging the issue.
 
~enigma~ said:
Get your physics straight. If there were tears that would mean the pole slipped. If the pole slipped that would mean you don't understand physics or logic. IOW, you have been "deceived" by the cowardly idiots of CIT.
Click to expand...

IOW you haven't seen the video, or the tear. :rolleyes:

Damn, they really beefed up the leather strength in those cars huh? I mean
enough to support a light pole from dropping onto the hood of a car in a skid
and all!

:big:

Are you guys really this
Edited by tim: 
Please do not try to circumvent the autocensor.


Never mind, I wont say it. I don't need another warning.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If you are prepared to sit through this, watch at 43.32 mins, Ranke reveals exactly why he has no understanding of the fragility of human memory. Ranke is questioning Lloyd on the David Icke book in his car, Lloyd is telling him about a class he was attending that introduced him to the book:

Lloyd England - What's the woman that was killed? All this government stuff. I think they're from England. They were killed in a car in a tunnel.

Craig Ranke - Princess Diana?

LE - Right, thats right. All this, we were dealing with all this. We were dealing with books on, on...

CR - Conspiracies?

LE - Yeah, i mean all this stuff is big game, all this hush-hush stuff.

After this conversation where Lloyd England has shown the vulnerability of his memory in struggling to remember the name and country of Princess Diana. This is the exact moment in the film where Craig Ranke decides to make a "special note":

Craig Ranke - Now, I want to make a special note here at how lucid and clear Lloyd is.

Why is he making this 'special note' here? It was probably the worst moment in the entire 1 hour 35 mins to make this point!

Ranke suggests just prior to this that the class that Lloyd England attended is suspicious in itself. He says in a cloak and dagger style that 'we'll never know what kind of class it was that Lloyd England attended'. Why didn't he ask him? He was in a car with him for an hour and a half! Maybe they did ask him and it was a course on 'Why people believe stupid things?'
 
Turbofan said:
We have LLoyd going back on his word. What more do you need to indicate a government cover-up?
Click to expand...

Proof that Lloyd is deliberately trying to deceive and not just an old man who is confused about a few details of a horrific event he witnessed seven years ago.

Proof that Lloyd would have to be involved and couldn't just be tricked like the hundreds of other people CIT believes were fooled that day (including their other witnesses.

Calculations showing that CIT's flight path is physically & aerodynamically possible.

and finally..

Proof that CIT has taken their "evidence" of Lloyd's guilt to the proper authorities.
 
Turbofan said:
Yup, they did. So your momma knocked down the light poles then?

Ummm...can I get a laughing dog now? Perhaps a homer out of the park too? :rolleyes:

Typical GL bs. You guys don't put all the pieces together.
Click to expand...

Thanks for agreeing that two witnesses testified about descent and thanks for agreeing that all of CIT's witnesses said the plane hit the Pentagon!

And that is important, because those CIT witnesses' flight paths were shown to Lloyde in the video.

So put the pieces together. First, provide the calculations showing that an airliner could have flown the CIT NOC flight path. I think you will find, Turbo that an airliner could not fly the CIT NOC flight paths.

So if CIT's NOC flight path is impossible.... that means.... well, you put the pieces together!
 
Turbofan said:
See-saw? The interior the car is maybe 6 feet from dash to rear seat.

How long and heavy is that light pole? :eek:
Click to expand...

Are you implying the pole is heavier than the car?

The back seat would only need to support the wieght of the pole past the fulcrum point on the dashboard.

You need to use that 3 pound organ on the top of your neck.
 
16.5 said:
So put the pieces together. First, provide the calculations showing that an airliner could have flown the CIT NOC flight path. I think you will find, Turbo that an airliner could not fly the CIT NOC flight paths.
Click to expand...

Could not fly NOC? Why not? Is there some sort of black hole north of the
Annex, or gas station? :rolleyes:

You guys are wasting my time. Somebody must be paying you all to write this
garbage, nobody can be that naive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom