Merged Abolute proof UAL 175 never struck WTC tower 2

[twinstead]

Could that be because the flight tracker will plot the flight path? Unlike a lot of people here, I'm not trying to take cheap shots. I'm curious about your video, but I think there may be some logical explanations.

Come on. You KNOW you want to take cheap shots too. You can't fight the feeling, Red.

 

[JSSTyger]

if you dont know how it works, then how can you be sure that the data that it uses is the most current and up to date information? or that it could receive bad data, and interpret it wrong?

did you even read where I stated that following such data, can be wrong? Where I tracked my parent's flight, and it told me that they were still in the air, when THEY had already landed?

Well...at what point in time was UA 175 headed Northeast and at the Connecticut border??? It certainly wasn't heading to the WTC from there!!. So the data is definitely taken at some point along a path that is AT LEAST projected after the WTC 2 crash time. And I would suspect the flight data is tracked by some system within the aircraft. 3,000 or whatever aircraft in the skies at any one point....I don't think the FAA wants to rely on a "projected" path...or at least I would have a very hard time believing that.

 

[T.A.M.]

Fine...then where is AA flight 11 and why do you say it is still hovering around manhattan when Flight 175 (which arrived later) has fled Manhattan

And no I do not know how flight explorer works

so your proof, your "absolute proof" is a clip of a cable channel using software that you self admittedly have no clue about, that shows a "location" on a graphic of a plane labeled "UAL 175"?

That is it? That is your proof?

We need to create a new award for the "most ridiculous truther evidence of the week", and guess who wins the first one?

Wait, wait, what do I hear???

JSS, It's your paranoia calling.

TAM

 

[Arus808]

Well...at what point in time was UA 175 headed Northeast and at the Connecticut border???

did you even bother to read the product description for Flight Explorer? did you forget that the transponders that SENDS the FAA their locations was turned off for both flights?

YOU're not really good at this are you?

 

[Bobert]

Come on. You KNOW you want to take cheap shots too. You can't fight the feeling, Red.

Cheap shots, ROCK!

 

[T.A.M.]

Cheap shots, ROCK!

Usually I do not like mocking people, but stupidity that results in false accusations of mass murder needs to beaten to a pulp.

TAM

 

[Pardalis]

Call me skeptical but I scoff when I see any thread title that begins with the words "absolute proof."

Still, I think the video is interesting, but I can come up with innocuous explanation. MSNBC while broadcasting live, was not airing a live feed from the flight tracker.

Now, that's my initial thought. If there's evidence that the flight tracker is live, it is compelling evidence, but I suspect it's an issue of time delay.

Here is our Redibis trying to look agnostic.

My god Red, you are capable of debunking!

TAM

Nah, he's only on the side of reason whenever no-planers are around.

 

[RedIbis]

My god Red, you are capable of debunking!

TAM

I do it all the time.

If I used smilies I'd put one of those smiling winking ones here.

 

[Pardalis]

What about the DNA evidence in the Pentagon Red? You never answered that, BTW.

 

[JSSTyger]

did you even bother to read the product description for Flight Explorer? did you forget that the transponders that SENDS the FAA their locations was turned off for both flights?

YOU're not really good at this are you?

I am pretty good actually. Better than you because if what you say is true than this flights data would not be showing on the screen because its transponder was off (blown to bits). And it would not be shown near the Conn. border either.

 

[BCR]

Here we go again. "Absolute proof" based on a media report for which no primary source data can be offered to back it up. Did the tooth fairy go to NYC as well?

 

[A W Smith]

I am pretty good actually. Better than you because if what you say is true than this flights data would not be showing on the screen because its transponder was off (blown to bits). And it would not be shown near the Conn. border either.

your not paying attention, Flight Explorer doesn't get its data directly from a transponder. It gets it from the FAA.

 

[applecorped]

I am pretty good actually. Better than you because if what you say is true than this flights data would not be showing on the screen because its transponder was off (blown to bits). And it would not be shown near the Conn. border either.

Case closed.

 

[332nd]

I am pretty good actually. Better than you because if what you say is true than this flights data would not be showing on the screen because its transponder was off (blown to bits). And it would not be shown near the Conn. border either.

Why would they blow up the transponder? I don't know if it has a switch, but I'm sure if they were to disconnect it from it's power source it wouldn't send.

 

[Arus808]

I am pretty good actually. Better than you because if what you say is true than this flights data would not be showing on the screen because its transponder was off (blown to bits). And it would not be shown near the Conn. border either.

wow you've shown that you never bothered to read the product description nor understand how the program get its data.

for those with a third grade reading level

1) transponder = sends info to the FAA
2) FAA receives info
3) FAA disseminates info. Can be all of the info, can be some of the info...etc
4) 3rd party program uses that info to provide flight path information to the consumer (or whomever is interested in that type of thing). 3rd party program clearly states in its description, that it receives WHATEVER the FAA sends to them.

Where in these small steps are you getting confused about?

and what part of the information are you having trouble in understanding that the transponder, was turned off for the flights, and that their LAST known position would be the LAST thing received by the FAA and then "shared" by them to whomever? And that they wouldn't be sharing any additional information seeing as they had over 1000 other planes in the sky to worry about?

 

[JSSTyger]

I know some of are so hardened by being in the JREF forums forever. I know that some of you just don't want to accept proof when you see it. But GD, by itself, that vid is a pretty damn solid piece of evidence.

Why the H is that flight still projecting data miles and miles after it crossed paths with the WTC towers???? WASN'T THE TRANSPONDER OFF??? If the system is truly is dependent on a flights current position (or past) then how are we able to see it on the screen near Connecticut and heading NE?

BTW I took a flight to Hawaii from LAX in 2003 and they had an onboard monitor showing exactly where we were and it was pretty much real time. Yes I know thats after 2001 but still...

 

[Thunder]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6UuH6D4pob8

1) Tower 2 is down
2) Very few planes on the radar screen (for those who are still skeptical)
3) Plane is headed back to Boston (further proof the FAA had already given the command to ground all aircraft)
4) This is a national news media broadcast

Any questions?

I have one question:

Is this a joke?

 

[twinstead]

I just don't get it. Are you an American, JSS? If so, I am REALLY starting to get concerned about our education system. Seriously. God forbid I ever get you as a juror if I am ever on trial.

 

[Arus808]

I know some of are so hardened by being in the JREF forums forever.

this has no bearing on what you provided thus far, which has been absolutely nothing

1) you dont understand how Flight Explorer works
2) you dont understand how the FAA sends out information for 3rd party programs like Flight explorer works
3) you dont understand that the transponders were turned off for both flights so the last bit of information that was sent to the FAA was their last position before they were turned off

It has nothing to do with being apart of JREF. IT has everything do with, when someone makes wild accusations, the person making those accusations should be prepared to BACK UP their accusations with PROOF.

YOU have not provided anything of the sort.

 

[twinstead]

I'm afraid all I can submit now is showtunes:

...coooooooooooooooognitive dissonance, where the wind comes sweeping down the plain....