• 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.

Ed All 43 videos "Second Hit"" [Explosion]at WTC 2: Plane or No Plane?

Status
Not open for further replies.
jammonius said:
Assistant FBI Director Barry Mawn

I could see the north tower from here and really a huge black hole which was still, you know, some fire and smoking on the north side of the tower.
My initial thought was this was a terrible accident, but I requested that these people start to respond to the World Trade complex and that I would meet them down there. We were observing the evacuation when we actually saw the second plane come down, flying north to south, actually turn around. And then we lost it momentarily behind the buildings, and then the next time we saw it, it was headed straight for the south tower.
http://www-cgi.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0202/18/lt.17.html


This one comes from CNN and is not, therefore, a valid source. Nonetheless, it is from a person with a big title. This one is intriguing. I will not count it right now because it is hearsay. But, I'd be willing to discuss this one with posters here and, perhaps, do a little research into the background of this FBI official.
Click to expand...

This is a TRANSCRIPT of a VIDEO that was recorded by CNN. So, you're saying his AUDIO INTERVIEW is not admissable? Horse****.
 
Originally Posted by bill smith
Jammonius you might find this video iteresting around the 8 minutes-odd mark.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jop84...eature=channel

Compared to..

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/882537...el_hezarkhani/
Click to expand...

jammonius said:
Bill,

As I indicated, the Flight 175 simulation of 4min40sec of the supposed Flight 175 flight path, based on using a Boeing simulator and the known data is an excellent piece of data.
Click to expand...
That wasn't a "Boeing" simulator in the video, it was a MS simulator program, no type rating required.

The simulation, based on the NTSB flight path and other data confirms the flight path and rate of descent is impossible and the data do not correlate with what is seen in the alleged Flight 175 crash videos.

Let me repeat that:

The simulation, based on the NTSB flight path and other data confirms the flight path and rate of descent is impossible and the data do not correlate with what is seen in the alleged Flight 175 crash videos.
Click to expand...
Repeat it all you want, it isn't true. Mind coming up with something factual?

It may be that this 9:44 video is worth its own thread. Certainly, if fits in this thread, imho, but the topic is specifically unique to warrant another thread standing alone.

As you are the person who posted up this video, I will leave it to your discretion as to whether you want to start a new thread on the video.
Click to expand...

Before you and the pretty Miss BS go dancing off in to the sunset to join the ranks of two of the most idiotic individuals to ever make a statement about how aircraft fly, you may want to do a little research. Not about MS Flight Sim, but real world aeronautics. And just for your edification, Youtube U. is not where you might want to do most of your studies.
As I have stated before, several times in fact, there are several members of this forum that are pilots, real ones. Remember that while saying that a 757/767 can’t descend at 4300ft/min. Do you have any idea what the maximum descent rate is for a 757/767? Didn’t think so; make that part of your research.
Just out of curiosity, how many actual flight hours have you and BS logged… as a pilot, not a passenger.
 
My apologies Jammy, I forgot to ask. How are you making out with getting a ticket? Need help?
 
Jammy, if you don't think planes crashed in NYC, Washington or Shanksville, what tasteless things would you say to the family members of people who were on the planes?
 
Last edited:
triforcharity said:
This is a TRANSCRIPT of a VIDEO that was recorded by CNN. So, you're saying his AUDIO INTERVIEW is not admissable? Horse****.
Click to expand...


DNA evidence? Planted.
Radar tracks? Falsified.
Video? Faked.
Audio? Inconclusive.
Eyewitnesses? Mistaken.
News Reports? Fabricated.
Expert Testimony? Corrupt.


Mix and match tri, mix and match.

Compus
 
triforcharity said:
Don't encourage him.....
Click to expand...


Indeed. I'm personally quite content with him being essentially locked up on the Internet.

While he performs his in-depth Google searches, turns his personal fantasies into reality through repetition and sheer force of will, holds earth-shattering debates with the enemies of humanity on a message board frequented by billions, it must fill him with immeasurable pride that he is ascending beyond the fantasy that everyone calls reality.

And when that withered husk we peons refer to as a body ceases to function, he will have finally found the truth and freedom he seeks.

Soldier on, jammonius. Soldier on... /salute
 
Last edited:
jammonius said:
Bill,

As I indicated, the Flight 175 simulation of 4min40sec of the supposed Flight 175 flight path, based on using a Boeing simulator and the known data is an excellent piece of data.

The simulation, based on the NTSB flight path and other data confirms the flight path and rate of descent is impossible and the data do not correlate with what is seen in the alleged Flight 175 crash videos.

Let me repeat that:

The simulation, based on the NTSB flight path and other data confirms the flight path and rate of descent is impossible and the data do not correlate with what is seen in the alleged Flight 175 crash videos.

It may be that this 9:44 video is worth its own thread. Certainly, if fits in this thread, imho, but the topic is specifically unique to warrant another thread standing alone.

As you are the person who posted up this video, I will leave it to your discretion as to whether you want to start a new thread on the video.

Here, then, is an attempt at a graphic index of the first segment of the video going from 0:00 to 2:30:

[qimg]http://i1008.photobucket.com/albums/af205/jfibonacci/flightsimvideo/1-9flight175simulation.jpg?t=1280782895[/qimg]

1--0:00-0:22-- Claims "pilots dispute" whether a Boeing 767 could descend 20,000ft in 4min4sec

2--0:22-0:37-- Flight simulation needed. Claims using Boeing 747 simulation to detail Boeing 767 flight is valid.

3--0:44-0:52--"Official story" of Flight 175 from National Security Archives is referenced as a data point.

4--0:52-0:59 Claims to use NTSB "Flight Path Study" that was based on "is this exercise or is this real world" data about which we do not know whether it is the one or the other.

5--1:00-1:28 References use of radar data from NTSB study in the reconstruction and explains the use of the flight path data points A to G.

6--1:29 - 1:35 The scene now changes to that of an aircraft Simulator with the claim that Flight 175 is at 31,000ft.

7--1:36-1:44 The white triangle on the simulator is said to represent the plane and the points of reference from the NTSB radar data.

8--1:44- 2:10 The radar points are coordinated with the simulator and it is explained how it is that the tracking can be done with accuracy.

9--2:10-2:30The NTSB data is then used to plot a chart of the descent, including rate, speed and so on over the course of the last 4min40sec. of the supposed flight.

That concludes the first segment of the video. The next is entitiled Reconstruction and begins at about the 2:30mark.
Click to expand...

Take it away Jam. Stick it to them.lol
 
Titanic Explorer said:
\


I don't care what he thinks- I'm just curious *why* a person would draw such insane conclusions about 9/11. Is it ignorance? is it mental illness?
Click to expand...


It's a combination of knowing too much yet not knowing enough, a narcissistic personality and an almost superhuman ability to reduce cognitive dissonance by ignoring reality.
 
OK, posters, lurkers and victims family members, time for progress

Compus Mentus, Flight 175 Exercise -- Let's Help Make it a bit more useful:

It will be noticed that Compus Mentus is treating this thread to an exercise in naming alleged passengers on alleged Flight 175 by using memorial-testimonials to prove they were passengers. That exercise is fallacious but that doesn't matter because it is designed to evoke maximum emotional response. Thus trumping reason and rational thought.

This attempt to engage in an emotional onslaught was demonstrated right at the outset of Compus' ongoing exercise. The very first post on the subject of alleged Flight 175 passengers tugged very strongly on our emotions:

In Compus 1st post on this, it started this way:

"I have no doubt Christine Hanson died in the arms of her mother and father on flight 175."

Edited by LashL: 
Do not change someone's post without making it abundantly clear what you have changed.


http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6156388&postcount=2446

Then, in Compus' 2nd post on this topic, we were given the supposed seating chart, passenger, crew and hijacker count:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6157461&postcount=2501

This is the chart given to us by Compus:

344914c4b760c65ba9.jpg


We can make use of this chart for a variety of forensic purposes as we shall presently see. We can use the chart, for starters, to call attention to what appears to be an apparent error that Compus first mentioned in Post # 2563

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6159567&postcount=2563

That post is the first to use the following form that Compus repeats in many other subsequent posts. But, its first use was way back on 7/25 in post # 2563, where Compus said:

"On the morning of September 11 2001, United Airlines Flight 175 was flying to Los Angeles from Boston, and was hijacked by Islamic terrorists. Shortly after taking off it was deliberately flown into the South Tower of the World Trade Centre, New York.

59 passengers and crew were on board (not counting the hijackers).

All were killed."

The post provided a memorial-testimonial for the Victor Saracini, Pilot

But, posters, lurkers and victims family members, look at the chart. The chart says there were 51 passengers and 9 crew.

According to chart there were, therefore, a total of 60 passengers/crew.

What happened Compus? Who did you leave out?

The apparent error has been repeated over and over again by Compus beginning in post # 2563. Along with the repitition of the error, something else has been repeated over and over by Compus, right?

That is:

"Immutable facts. Unassailable reason."

Sheesh, Compus. I think you better quick make some changes, otherwise, your repititve posting will look a tad ridiculous, don't you think?

Why did all you avid supporters of the common storyline of 9/11 allow that apparent error as between Compus and the chart go on for so long with no one saying nothing? :confused:


You folks left it up to me, one of the thread's NO PLANERS, to call attention to an error in information that you folks seem to hold close on to sacrosanct. WTF? :boggled:

Do better. :D

Compus, next foray is found in post # 2601.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6161209&postcount=2601

This one provides the memorial-tesitmonial for:

Michael Horrocks First Officer

Next is:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6161979&postcount=2619

Robert J. Fangman, Flight Attendant

Next:

Amy N. Jarret, Flight Attendant
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6162294&postcount=2636

Then:

Amy R. King, 29, and Michael C. Tarrou, Flight Attendants
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6163097&postcount=2659

Kathryn L. LaBorie, Flight Attendant
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6165248&postcount=2691

Alfred Gilles Padre Joseph Marchand
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6168091&postcount=2715

Alicia Nicole Titus
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6168728&postcount=2728

Alona Avraham,
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6168860&postcount=2740

Garnet Edward "Ace" Bailey
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6169471&postcount=2749

Mark Bavis
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6169940&postcount=2760

Graham Andrew Berkeley,
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6171837&postcount=2794

Touri Bolourchi
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6178206&postcount=2851

Daniel Brandhorst, Ronald Gamboa, David Gamboa-Brandhorst,
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6178607&postcount=2870

Heads up Compus. Please check the spelling of the name Brandhorst and then take a look at your post.

John Brett Cahill
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6181001&postcount=2892

Christoffer Carstanjen
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6184038&postcount=2921

John J. Corcoran
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6186600&postcount=2946


Running Total:

Passengers:
Hanson's seated in 19C,D,E 3/51
Avraham, 22G 4/51
Bailey, 6F 5/51
Bavis, 19F 6/51
Berkeley, 6B 7/51
Bolourchi, 15C 8/51
Brandhurst, Gamboa, Gamboa-Brandhurst 8A,B,C 11/51
Cahill, 6E 12/51
Carstanjen, 20A 13/51
Corcoran, 21G 14/51

Crew:
Saracini-pilot 1/9
Horrocks-first officer 2/9
Fangman-flight attendant 3/9
Jarret-flight attendant 4/9
King-flight attendant 5/9
Tarrou-flight attendant 6/9
Laborie-flight attendant 7/9
Marchand-flight attendant 8/9
Titus-flight attendant 9/9

Now that we are in the process of matching the memorial-testimonial information to the location of where the people were sitting or stationed, does anyone here, anyone at all, think we can do a little forensic work based on this information?

Keep on posting up, Compus. Of course, please try to correct the ongoing error or otherwise explain the discrepancy between your mantra and the chart.

Many thanks
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Someone counted wrong and was off by 1 person. Further proof no planes hit the towers.
 
Yes jammonius, lets focus on what amounts to an accounting error and not your glaring examples of illogic.

Are you tired of handwaving away the population of Lower Manhattan yet? You know thousands of them saw the airplanes crash into the buildings with with their own eyes? You haven't heard that one yet? Tis true.

Or maybe you'd like to explain why Ed Felt and his fellow passengers and the crew of of United 93 was not found in Shanksville and not identified using their DNA profiles? Betcha by golly wow.

Or maybe you'd like to write another despicable post suggesting the families were paid off.

Naaaaaaaaaaaaaaaw, let's focus on a solitary error.


:nope:
 
Last edited:
excaza said:
Someone counted wrong and was off by 1 person. Further proof no planes hit the towers.
Click to expand...



It's true I seem to have made a mistake with the passenger numbers on Flight 175.

When I first began to look into the subject, this source HERE is the first I studied. I know I should have double-checked the number but I'll hold my hands up and say sorry for the slip.

I'll adjust any further posts accordingly.

It is worthy to note that jammonius makes no attempt to refute the more significant facts that are presented in these posts. Instead concentrating on minor errors and typo's. This is the typical MO of the truther. Nit-pick like a scabby monk, find a piddling anomaly then run like the clappers with it.

The facts that are immutable are there for all to see. That these people all flew on Flight 175 on 9/11. Have never been seen alive since, are mourned by family and friends. The unassailable reason is that they all died when the jet crashed into that tower. No-planers cannot counter the base arguments held within. They are stymied by the intellectual brick-wall they slam into here.

What is of great satisfaction to me is my initial instinct about jammonius' reaction to my postings (about the passengers) was correct. Having been played out plenty of rope, jammonius is slowly stringing himself up.

Compus
 
Last edited:
Discussion about life insurance policies of soldiers and the practices of insurers has been split to a separate thread here.
Posted By: LashL
 
Jammie Dodger does not in fact exist ... rather just a series of "shadowy" windbag postings on a computer screen.

So let's all "double check for accuracy" and look to our own screens ... do we in fact even SEE a poster by the name of jammonius ???

I can't ... just some "shadowy" scribblings, could be anything !!!

So let's all as well, get involved in over-arching over-interpreted hyperbole presented in a psuedo-sincere style ... :rolleyes:

Does anybody see the poster jammonius ???
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom