dafydd
Banned
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2008
- Messages
- 35,398
Is that really Jammonious? I knew he had a screw loose,but I didn't know that he was that far gone.
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
Ed All 43 videos "Second Hit"" [Explosion]at WTC 2: Plane or No Plane?
- Thread starter jammonius
- Start date
-
- Tags
- no plane theory no planes
- Status
Is that really Jammonious? I knew he had a screw loose,but I didn't know that he was that far gone.
Pinch
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2007
- Messages
- 401
I disagree totally. There has to be some sort of intellectual rigor applied to the discussions here at JREF. This jammonious person was making an absolute mockery of that, whether intentionally or on a lark. The fact that so many here were feeding that mockery, including myself on a few posts, merely accentuated the inane nature of the discussions and how absolutely ridiculous, idiotic and stupid they really were.
I'm glad he's gone. Will that feed the trolls by adding to their "See? They know they're wrong and they can't HANDLE the truth!"? psychosis? Who cares? You could walk out of the bathroom after a supremely satisfying movement and they would find some way of tying that into a grand conspiracy against some high or low 9/11 Truther BS thing or another.
Let this jammonious person go weave his incredibly obtuse words and phrases on some other discussion board. His posts and comments here are merely one of the many assaults on common sense, logical thinking and the proper usage of critical thinking skills that the Truthers have launched. Good riddance.
Seriously. To what intellectual benefit have you or anyone on this board come away with after reading any or all of this jammonious person's commentary? Anything? A line should be drawn between the really insane and those who exercise the application of logic and thinking in the discussions of the day. This jammonious person is really insane if he actually believes the things he is a) posting under his name and b) if indeed he is a Judy Woods disciple.
Last edited:
I am not sure why, because as Brainster and others have commented, the No-planer guano is no worse then any of the other CTs, but for some reason that line in the sand you suggest, for me, is the plane/no-plane line. I barely give the no-planers the time of day, except to call them idiots or lunatics.
For me, while I can see glimmers of reality in some of the other CTs, I see nothing but insanity in the no-planer theory.
TAM
TJM
Potsing Whiled Runk
Absolutely right. And beside the point.
If somebody is reported then everyone should've been reported, not just the truther because he's the adversary. You could interpret a lot of posts in this thread as spam, including a number of my own.
That's all I'm saying.
My thanks to Macgyver and to AJM for their protest posts. Well done.
OK, posters, lurkers
I had already foreseen that this thread and my posting in it were heading towards an unfortunate, from my perspective, outcome.
As early as post # 251 I voluntarily deleted an image, correctly foreshadowing subsequent deletions and other administrative actions, and accurately noting in my next post after # 251 (#253) as follows:
"I hope you've had a chance to take a look at the NIST photo. I am going to edit the post because in my position it is better to err on the side of over compliance with the rules, rather than under compliance, if you get my drift... "
See: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5950309&postcount=251
See also: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5950331&postcount=253
The imagery of 9/11 was, itself, "spam" but it was spewed in the most widely watched media there is -- mainstream teevee -- and it had the hypnotic effect of making people believe jetliners were involved when they were not. 9/11 is a PSYOP of unprecedented magnitude.
Our capacity to distinguish the real from the unreal was tested and we have failed to grasp the needed distinction, so far. However, that will change. It should not be all that hard to be skeptical about imagery shown on teevee. I don't know why posters defend teevee so vigorously. Most of what is shown on teevee is false.
In order to overcome the illusion, it might actually be necessary to look at the fake imagery in detail, frame by frame and, certainly, each segment, by each segment. Ironically, perhaps, the needed detailed review might not happen until mainstream teevee does it. An awakening is inevitable, we just don't know exactly when that will occur. People are gradually realizing how stupid teevee makes them. People may soon begin to demand better.
One current example of "insult being added to injury" is Fox News giving about equal time to who won Idol and the BP oil spill. Little is being said about the degree of censorship occurring in the coverage of that mega-disaster. True, there's little that can be done about it; and the GOM is heading for a massive and perhaps irreversible poisoning, but that doesn't mean we should be prevented from knowing about it because BP doesn't want us to know.
Media is just a tool. It can be used for good or for ill.
I respect the rules of the forum. It appears it will not be possible to engage in the process that I think is necessary; namely, a close review of each and every one of the ALL43 videos. The paradox here is that in order to overcome the hypnotic effect of the shadow thingy, it might well be necessary to look at it as often now as we were mandated to do on and after 9/11. Teevee was the spamming agent.
I am going to cease posting regularly in the thread and will leave with one final image.
This is from segment # 12 in the ALL43 video and it is, imho, the single best one of the entire lot. I only started posting the segments matching thread page numbers at pg. 14 of the thread. Hence, this one was not previously posted.
If you're going to limit your review to one or a few of the ALL 43, this is the one that posters and lurkers need to focus on over and above all the rest, even moreso than the Evan Fairbanks one, that is also important. There's also # that likewise shows no plane that is important as well. Plus, the "money shot" one is important for demonstration of impossible impact dynamics.
# 12, however, comes closest in depicting the reality and in what the people have to say. It is fairly lengthy, running from about 2:53 - 3:21.
My assumption is that the holographic imagery has anamolies where it could only be seen from some, but not all angles, and where its appearance may have varied from place to place. Hence, that is why some people reported seeing a plane flying upside down, others reported a plane with no windows, to name some of the anamolies reported by witnesses:
The imagery in # 12 shows: NO PLANE (however, it may show a shadowy, cloud like image, thus providing evidence of holographic technology)
The sound reveals: AN EXPLOSION, but no jetliner sound at all, consistent, by the way, with virtually all of the ALL43 videos. In not one single segment can the true sound of a jetliner @ 800ft @ 550mph, be said to be heard.
The people say: WTF WAS THAT? I DON'T KNOW, THEY'RE ... BOMBING IT, (i.e., they saw no plane)
12
http://i1008.photobucket.com/albums...e/12-panbackblkynNOPLANESEEN.png?t=1274966225
It is anticipated that naysayers will claim the video location is too far away for a plane to have been seen and heard and that the video sound capacity was too limited. I know from experience that it does little good to get into "he said/she said" contests in this thread. What posters here say they see and what they say about whatever data is under consideration is always right and what I say about the data I post up is always wrong.
That much is a given in posting, here, right Lapman?
In my view, if one could see the Twin Towers, then one could hear the unmistakable sound of a widebody jetliner @800ft@550mph, because that sound is one of the loudest that is produced by manmade devices that emit sound. (period)
No such sound is heard in the sound track; but, an explosion coming a few seconds after the fireball, is heard. There was nothing wrong with the mic on that camera and it accurately recorded the sound of the event. The sound of a jetliner is missing because there was no jetliner there--duh.
The jetliner engine noise and vibrational impact should have been heard at least as loud as the explosion and probably louder and over a longer time period. There was nothing, zero, zilch, nada, heard suggestive of a jetliner. Neither the mic nor the people heard it. There response was: WTF and BOMBING.
Hence, no jetliner was there. Boeing 767s are not designed for their noise limiters to work when they are at full throttle.
I will now join the lurker group for this thread. I might, however, start taking a look at BP related threads. I'm afraid that situation could get very ugly and might precipitate further erosion in social cohesion, posters and lurkers. I suggest the following thread:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=176826
take care
OK, posters, lurkers
I had already foreseen that this thread and my posting in it were heading towards an unfortunate, from my perspective, outcome.
As early as post # 251 I voluntarily deleted an image, correctly foreshadowing subsequent deletions and other administrative actions, and accurately noting in my next post after # 251 (#253) as follows:
"I hope you've had a chance to take a look at the NIST photo. I am going to edit the post because in my position it is better to err on the side of over compliance with the rules, rather than under compliance, if you get my drift... "
See: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5950309&postcount=251
See also: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5950331&postcount=253
The imagery of 9/11 was, itself, "spam" but it was spewed in the most widely watched media there is -- mainstream teevee -- and it had the hypnotic effect of making people believe jetliners were involved when they were not. 9/11 is a PSYOP of unprecedented magnitude.
Our capacity to distinguish the real from the unreal was tested and we have failed to grasp the needed distinction, so far. However, that will change. It should not be all that hard to be skeptical about imagery shown on teevee. I don't know why posters defend teevee so vigorously. Most of what is shown on teevee is false.
In order to overcome the illusion, it might actually be necessary to look at the fake imagery in detail, frame by frame and, certainly, each segment, by each segment. Ironically, perhaps, the needed detailed review might not happen until mainstream teevee does it. An awakening is inevitable, we just don't know exactly when that will occur. People are gradually realizing how stupid teevee makes them. People may soon begin to demand better.
One current example of "insult being added to injury" is Fox News giving about equal time to who won Idol and the BP oil spill. Little is being said about the degree of censorship occurring in the coverage of that mega-disaster. True, there's little that can be done about it; and the GOM is heading for a massive and perhaps irreversible poisoning, but that doesn't mean we should be prevented from knowing about it because BP doesn't want us to know.
Media is just a tool. It can be used for good or for ill.
I respect the rules of the forum. It appears it will not be possible to engage in the process that I think is necessary; namely, a close review of each and every one of the ALL43 videos. The paradox here is that in order to overcome the hypnotic effect of the shadow thingy, it might well be necessary to look at it as often now as we were mandated to do on and after 9/11. Teevee was the spamming agent.
I am going to cease posting regularly in the thread and will leave with one final image.
This is from segment # 12 in the ALL43 video and it is, imho, the single best one of the entire lot. I only started posting the segments matching thread page numbers at pg. 14 of the thread. Hence, this one was not previously posted.
If you're going to limit your review to one or a few of the ALL 43, this is the one that posters and lurkers need to focus on over and above all the rest, even moreso than the Evan Fairbanks one, that is also important. There's also # that likewise shows no plane that is important as well. Plus, the "money shot" one is important for demonstration of impossible impact dynamics.
# 12, however, comes closest in depicting the reality and in what the people have to say. It is fairly lengthy, running from about 2:53 - 3:21.
My assumption is that the holographic imagery has anamolies where it could only be seen from some, but not all angles, and where its appearance may have varied from place to place. Hence, that is why some people reported seeing a plane flying upside down, others reported a plane with no windows, to name some of the anamolies reported by witnesses:
The imagery in # 12 shows: NO PLANE (however, it may show a shadowy, cloud like image, thus providing evidence of holographic technology)
The sound reveals: AN EXPLOSION, but no jetliner sound at all, consistent, by the way, with virtually all of the ALL43 videos. In not one single segment can the true sound of a jetliner @ 800ft @ 550mph, be said to be heard.
The people say: WTF WAS THAT? I DON'T KNOW, THEY'RE ... BOMBING IT, (i.e., they saw no plane)
12
http://i1008.photobucket.com/albums...e/12-panbackblkynNOPLANESEEN.png?t=1274966225
It is anticipated that naysayers will claim the video location is too far away for a plane to have been seen and heard and that the video sound capacity was too limited. I know from experience that it does little good to get into "he said/she said" contests in this thread. What posters here say they see and what they say about whatever data is under consideration is always right and what I say about the data I post up is always wrong.
That much is a given in posting, here, right Lapman?
In my view, if one could see the Twin Towers, then one could hear the unmistakable sound of a widebody jetliner @800ft@550mph, because that sound is one of the loudest that is produced by manmade devices that emit sound. (period)
No such sound is heard in the sound track; but, an explosion coming a few seconds after the fireball, is heard. There was nothing wrong with the mic on that camera and it accurately recorded the sound of the event. The sound of a jetliner is missing because there was no jetliner there--duh.
The jetliner engine noise and vibrational impact should have been heard at least as loud as the explosion and probably louder and over a longer time period. There was nothing, zero, zilch, nada, heard suggestive of a jetliner. Neither the mic nor the people heard it. There response was: WTF and BOMBING.
Hence, no jetliner was there. Boeing 767s are not designed for their noise limiters to work when they are at full throttle.
I will now join the lurker group for this thread. I might, however, start taking a look at BP related threads. I'm afraid that situation could get very ugly and might precipitate further erosion in social cohesion, posters and lurkers. I suggest the following thread:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=176826
take care
Last edited:
tsig
a carbon based life-form
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2005
- Messages
- 39,049
How do you know you haven't been reported?
dafydd
Banned
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2008
- Messages
- 35,398
Goodbye,and get professional help for your mental problems.
George 152
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2002
- Messages
- 5,012
Jam claim:
In my view, if one could see the Twin Towers, then one could hear the unmistakable sound of a widebody jetliner @800ft@550mph, because that sound is one of the loudest that is produced by manmade devices that emit sound. (period)
In a word. NO
There are many louder manmade (whatever that means) sounds.
And the first aircraft -was- heard.
That's why the TV camera man panned up in time to record the fuel fireball...
In my view, if one could see the Twin Towers, then one could hear the unmistakable sound of a widebody jetliner @800ft@550mph, because that sound is one of the loudest that is produced by manmade devices that emit sound. (period)
In a word. NO
There are many louder manmade (whatever that means) sounds.
And the first aircraft -was- heard.
That's why the TV camera man panned up in time to record the fuel fireball...
Lurkers,
George's quote is next to meaningless as an explanation. Read literally, it comes close to being an acknowledgment that the alleged jetliner that allegedly hit the South Tower made NO SOUND. That is a reasonable interpretation of the desparate attempt to claim the first jet was heard, all as is clearly seen in the above quote, leaving the clear implication that the shadow thingy was not heard. More on that follows.
George's quote consists in its attempt to lay claim to a sound being emitted and recordered, somewhere, somehow, by someone, in connection solely with the first alleged jetliner, the one that supposedly hit the North Tower, even though this is a thread about the ALL 43 videos of the second alleged jetliner, the one that supposedly hit the South Tower.
We have two full threads on the Dick Oliver videos that put paid to that claim a jet was heard in that important audio visual information concerning what happened at the North Tower:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=171082
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=174043
It is in the nature of clear disinformation to continue to try to claim a jetliner is heard in the Dick Oliver video, for none is, and that is not what those who were present either said, let alone thought. Rather, the unmistakable highlight of the Dick Oliver video is this exclamation by David Stollick(sp):
It was jist an explosion
There was nothing to give them any impression of a jetliner, least of all the unmistakable sound they emit; especially low and at full throttle.
Those of you who are willing to look at the thread objectively will easily see that the range of what we can post has been subjected to a claim of "spam" meaning there's a limit on what can be posted. Fine. We all have to abide in the rules; no problem.
While there is more that could have been posted, the thread nonetheless contains a wealth of data from which the claim a jetliner hit the South Tower is fully and completed refuted.
I take some pride in having been able to show that.
In the ALL 43 video, there is not one single segment, not one single video capture of the event, that accurately reveals the sound of a jetliner @800ft@550mph.
The epistemology of this fact is that human beings apparently have an underdeveloped capacity to connect what they see with what they hear.
In order to know something about the world around us, we have to:
STOP
LOOK
LISTEN
Those who did that on 9/11 almost universally report neither seeing nor hearing (especially the latter) a jetliner.
Reports of seeing one are, of course, impacted by the false memory implanted by teevee.
But, as teevee did not include any sound of a jetliner, the false memory of hearing one is very unusual among witness reports. Nearly no one whose witness statement can be accessed, even amongst those that were planted in debunker websites, accurately refer to the sound assoicated with a low, fast jetliner. None, zero, zip, nada, zilch. Of course, that does not mean that statements planted in debunker websites are to be considered as valid witness statements, for they are not; but it does mean that, even there, the evidence of a jetliner, based on sound, is lacking.
Virtually all who have responded to my request to report on what they saw and heard are very clear in not reporting they heard a jetliner, lurkers.
Think this through.
BigAl
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2007
- Messages
- 5,397
TJM
Potsing Whiled Runk
Dick Oliver said he heard an airplane, Thousands saw 175 crash into 2 WTC.
Let it go jammonius.
Let it go jammonius.
dafydd
Banned
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2008
- Messages
- 35,398
You try thinking for a change.
Hey Lurkers,
Do any of you see any similarities between the above post and the playground "tattle-tale" tactic?
Do any lurkers here have an accurate count on the number of times BigAl posts the same tired post, over and over again?
As usual around here, whenever some poster accuses me of something, it is very likely that same poster has the tendency to do that which they accuse me of, has done so repeatedly and/or will soon do it.
Have posters around here given up on trying to show the ALL 43 videos are a source of a real and actual event?
That is certainly one way to interpret the BigAl post.
Last edited:
What do you mean, AJM? Do you think you have a better interpretation of what Dick Oliver said than anyone else does?
Macgyver1968
Philosopher
So..what happened to you being just a lurker, Jam? Miss the attention?
dafydd
Banned
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2008
- Messages
- 35,398
Another fib?
TJM
Potsing Whiled Runk
What part of "at first I thought it was an airplane" are you having trouble with? Sometimes things are just what they are and aren't open to interpretation. What you want to do is twist his words to make them fit your fantasy.
I have no trouble with it at all; all as was analyzed in great detail over the 60+ pages of the Dick Oliver threads. On the other hand, one might well ask you "what part of "at first I thought it was an airplane" YOU have trouble with.
Further, if you are having trouble, then merely consider what all else Dick Oliver said. That is the rational way to analyze witness statements.
I am not going to get into elementary grammar with you; it would be useless, besides, this is not the Dick Oliver thread; and, instead, is the ALL 43 video thread appertaining to the explosion at the South Tower, not the explosion at the North Tower.
all the best
- Status