Merged Abolute proof UAL 175 never struck WTC tower 2

[Mince]

See how easy it is to dupe someone* using a radio show, a Google search, a blog, a webpage, or a YouTube video?




*Of course, that "someone" has to be predisposed to being duped, like hatred for the government and all authority, or more than a bit of naivete for example. But once that condition is there, it's easy as pie, as they say.

 

[Pinch]

Yup. Who wants a drink?
[qimg]http://beer-ligion.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/hot_beer_girl.jpg[/qimg]

What a great....smile. Both of them.

 

[BCR]

Anyway, before this thread gets relegated to the dust bin, lets summarize.

The truthers don't know how Flight Explorer works, don't know what happens if the data is interupted, don't know whether the video tape showing Flight Explorer was live or not, and assuming it was live don't know what the data on the screen was showing, have no idea what the margin of error was, and have not talked to Flight Explorer and have no intention of doing so.

FAIL.

Yeah, something like that. I decided since all of this activity surrounding UAL175 that I had better get to work uploading the NYC Tracon audios. Then someone can explain to me what it was that professional pilots are heard watching fly up and slam into the second WTC.

I'm so sick of converting files to mp3 though. Someone tell my handler at the NWO that I need a raise.

 

[Hyver]

GXR 650. New used, actually.

God you people with new sports bikes make me so damn jealous. I really want a GSXR750, but for now my Katana 600 will have to do. Some day I'll be done with my undergrad, and then done with law school, and then will have paid off my student loans, and I'll get my bike. Some day... Have fun with it!

 

[jaydeehess]

No UAL 175 into the towers is just a wee bit less crazy than no planes at all. what's next no AA77 into the Pentagon, or no flight 93 into a feild in Penn.?.............oops

 

[Bobert]

If you people jumped all over NIST's findings as you are jumping on this video evidence, you might find yourself becoming a truther. However there doesn't seem to be a whole lot of skepticism in this supposed "skeptical" forum. Being a skeptic would be more like being a truther IMO. Why does nobody here seem in the least bit skeptical of the official accounts (FEMA, 911commissh, NIST)? I have lots of questions about 911 and to put it simply I think its pathetic that you people don't!

 

[Bobert]

this thread is offcially done now.


http://i205.photobucket.com/albums/bb180/girthdogg81/Selma.jpg

Oops hope that wet spot on my monitor comes off!

 

[Donal]

Anyway, before this thread gets relegated to the dust bin, lets summarize.

The truthers don't know how Flight Explorer works, don't know what happens if the data is interupted, don't know whether the video tape showing Flight Explorer was live or not, and assuming it was live don't know what the data on the screen was showing, have no idea what the margin of error was, and have not talked to Flight Explorer and have no intention of doing so.

FAIL.

You forgot about Arus808's bitchin ride.

 

[Donal]

Yup. Who wants a drink?
http://beer-ligion.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/hot_beer_girl.jpg

So thirsty...

 

[BCR]

If you people jumped all over NIST's findings as you are jumping on this video evidence, you might find yourself becoming a truther. However there doesn't seem to be a whole lot of skepticism in this supposed "skeptical" forum. Being a skeptic would be more like being a truther IMO. Why does nobody here seem in the least bit skeptical of the official accounts (FEMA, 911commissh, NIST)? I have lots of questions about 911 and to put it simply I think its pathetic that you people don't!

You sure do have a lot of b_lls JSSTyger. And exactly what have you done to be such a skeptic? You post a silly YouTube video put together by person(s) unknown using a Flight Explorer screen capure for which you have not taken the time to even investigate and understand what the h_ll you are looking at. Then you want to question the skeptism of those who don't take your "absolute proof" seriousy (which it is not even close by the way).

You come back and see me when you have some understanding of what you are talking about. Perhaps then someone will take you seriously. In the meantime, listen to what people are telling you and you just might learn something.

 

[twinstead]

Well, this thread certainly is "absolute proof" of something all right, just probably not what JSSTyger intended.

 

[TJM]

You forgot about Arus808's bitchin ride.

And the rider ain't no slouch either.

 

[Trojan]

JSSTyger is a special kind of truther, no amount of evidence will sway him.

http://www.youtube.com/user/JSSTyger

 

[240-185]

Super Metroid was an inside job!!!1111

 

[JSSTyger]

More on the extremely revealing Flight 175 video i showed yesterday

Alot of you were calling me a kook because you were saying the Flight Explorer data may have been a projected data for UAL flight 175.

I am here to prove this wrong.

In the very same video I showed yesterday, one of the planes still hovering over the WTC has a United tag as well. The orientation of that "stuck" plane is Northwest (well the plane was more due north...I think)...the orientation of the plane that hit tower 2. The elevation of that plane that is "stuck" over the WTC is about 700 feet. Thats about half the WTC height...seems about right.

You were all just looking at the flight near the Connecticut border which clearly labels itself as flight 175 with all the departure, arrival, serial number, etc info that we know is indeed flight 175's.

So indeed the plane that is shown heading NE is NOT the plane that hit the tower. The limitations of the program and lags, amount of info not given us, really does not matter.

So again I ask you to watch this video and hopefully the responses will not be as ummm...like they were last night...

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

 

[Bobert]

Wait a second I thought that you said goodbye and left?
Ignore for you

 

[JSSTyger]

I really think this is solid evidence.

 

[JSSTyger]

Wait a second I thought that you said goodbye and left?
Ignore for you

What I can't leave the thread to watch a basketball game?

 

[JSSTyger]

I also said I would look more into this

 

[JimBenArm]

Alot of you were calling me a kook because you were saying the Flight Explorer data may have been a projected data for UAL flight 175.

I am here to prove this wrong.

In the very same video I showed yesterday, one of the planes still hovering over the WTC has a United tag as well. The orientation of that "stuck" plane is Northwest (well the plane was more due north...I think)...the orientation of the plane that hit tower 2. The elevation of that plane that is "stuck" over the WTC is about 700 feet. Thats about half the WTC height...seems about right.

You were all just looking at the flight near the Connecticut border which clearly labels itself as flight 175 with all the departure, arrival, serial number, etc info that we know is indeed flight 175's.

So indeed the plane that is shown heading NE is NOT the plane that hit the tower. The limitations of the program and lags, amount of info not given us, really does not matter.

So again I ask you to watch this video and hopefully the responses will not be as ummm...like they were last night...

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

Yay! You came back! I knew you'd come back for me!

So, what'cha been up to? Anything interesting? How was your day?

Anything that I can help you with? Delusions of competency, believing stupid things, you know, stuff like that? I'll gladly help you rid yourself of this junk. After all, you're my bestest friend of all!

Can't wait to hear more from you!

Love:
Jim