• 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.

conspiracy psychology debunked

alienentity said:
Hmm, I wonder what psychologists would say about a person who persists in pushing an alternative story which is not supported by the evidence? And chastises others for taking the direct evidence (CVR transcripts and FDR data) at face value?

And attempts to distract from the overwhelming body of evidence for a hijacking scenario by introducing a fallacious objection?

Hmm, just wondering what kind of mind would do that.

ps, the CVR recordings are utterly independent of the 9/11 Commission report - they are a matter of public record for all to see.
Click to expand...

And again, an absolutely perfect example of how the myth precedes reality. The CVR recordings are not a matter of public record, nor are they available for "all to see."

Granted, we would expect as much, but if you do the slightest bit of research you will find that the recordings were played only once at the Moussaui trial and only a transcript was provided by the FBI. An FBI transcript without any possibility of independent verification is hardly evidence.
 
RedIbis said:
And again, an absolutely perfect example of how the myth precedes reality. The CVR recordings are not a matter of public record, nor are they available for "all to see."

Granted, we would expect as much, but if you do the slightest bit of research you will find that the recordings were played only once at the Moussaui trial and only a transcript was provided by the FBI. An FBI transcript without any possibility of independent verification is hardly evidence.
Click to expand...

The 9/11 Conspiracy Theories is hardly evidence of a cover-up too. Instead of just sitting there wasting everyones time, why don't you do yourself a favor and actually present your evidence instead of typing what you think? Anything that comes from you is hearsay. Now a Government document signed by Bush admitting that he planned 9/11, now that would be evidence.
 
9/11 Chewy Defense said:
The 9/11 Conspiracy Theories is hardly evidence of a cover-up too. Instead of just sitting there wasting everyones time, why don't you do yourself a favor and actually present your evidence instead of typing what you think? Anything that comes from you is hearsay. Now a Government document signed by Bush admitting that he planned 9/11, now that would be evidence.
Click to expand...

The only difference between you and Telltale Tom is that he knows what he's doing.
 
RedIbis said:
The only difference between you and Telltale Tom is that he knows what he's doing.
Click to expand...

Is Telltale Tom part of any fire service or dept. by any chance?

The only difference is expierence in the field. You loons say that fire couldn't have caused all 3 Towers to collapse when you don't have any expierence in the field of firefighting. I say you loons are full of ****! :cool:
 
RedIbis. Why do you think the hijackers crashed the aircraft into a field?
 
RedIbis said:
And again, an absolutely perfect example of how the myth precedes reality. The CVR recordings are not a matter of public record, nor are they available for "all to see."

Granted, we would expect as much, but if you do the slightest bit of research you will find that the recordings were played only once at the Moussaui trial and only a transcript was provided by the FBI. An FBI transcript without any possibility of independent verification is hardly evidence.
Click to expand...

The CVR was heard by the victim's family members. Are there any family members denying that it was their loved ones on the recording? Not that I've heard. Has any family member stated that what is on the transcript is not what they heard?

These are the important points. Yet the CT needs "independent verification" that the tapes are authentic. A U.S trial where evidence was presented and accepted by both the prosecution and the defense is not good enough for them. Why didn't the defense ask for independent verification?

See, this is the mindset of a CT. No evidence will satisfy them. When backed into a corner, everything could have been faked or planted. The question is why do they think this way?
 
Last edited:
RedIbis said:
Regardless of what you think the chances that they entered the cockpit were, there is no evidence that it ever happened. Even the Commission Report does not suggest they entered the cockpit.

I highlighted this misconception because it's indicative of how the myth has become assumed fact.
Click to expand...

Ok, let me spell this out for you.

The ijackers has taken control of the plane. Their intention is to crash their hijacked plane at a specific target, and die as a martyr.

They passengers have figured out their plot, and are starting to revolt.

They are attempting to enter the cockpit.

What is the best choice and still have some mission success?

Do you:

A) continue on towards your original intended target, and risk the passengers breaching the cockpit door and stopping your plans all together, or;

B) Crash the plane into the ground, assuring your martyr status, and killing everyone else on board?

Which one would seem more logical there Red?
 
Sabrina said:
Neither.

I'm asserting that, based on the audio recovered from the flight data recorder, the passengers mounted a rebellion of sorts and attempted to take control of the plane, and in the ensuing confusion either the hijackers made the deliberate decision to crash the plane in order to prevent the imminent takeover or did so accidentally (the audio doesn't indicate one way or another). As tri said, cockpit doors prior to 9/11 were rather flimsy affairs; I find it logical to conclude that the passengers were about to break in just before the hijackers either accidentally or deliberately flew the plane into the ground. But there's no indication merely from the audio one way or another that the passengers did break in or that the hijackers deliberately flew the plane into the ground or did so accidentally.
Click to expand...
The recording transcript you read is evidence the hijackers crashed on purpose to avoid the Passengers taking the plane. We know the Passengers mounted an attack, their families and friends were aware of their goal. The FDR shows inputs from the terrorists were erratic and made the final seconds of flight a nightmare for the Passengers attacking eh cockpit.

In the last three minutes the terrorist pilot pulled and pushed on the "stick" to give three major excursions to 4g and to -1 to -2g. In addition to these three positive and negative g experiences, there was a period of past zero g. There are four periods you would literally be on the ceiling, and three times on the ceiling weighing up to twice your weight, as if someone was holding you down, and when you hit the 4g three times, if you weighted 200, you are now stuck in the isle with a weight of 800 pounds, like someone is holding you to the ground. The plane was close to design limits.
 
RedIbis said:
Regardless of what you think the chances that they entered the cockpit were, there is no evidence that it ever happened. Even the Commission Report does not suggest they entered the cockpit.

I highlighted this misconception because it's indicative of how the myth has become assumed fact.
Click to expand...

And this means what? It wasn't Al Quaeda? Or thermite? NORAD standown? Inside jobby job?
Oh and who, exactly, claimed they DID enter the cockpit?
Or are you saying the passengers did NOT react to the situation? What part of the evidence on record do you consider to be faked or incorrectly interpreted? Be specific?

Or are you just throwing out a smoke-screen - targetin unaided by evidence? Again?

RedIbis, if we agreed with you completely - what would it change?
 
dommyboysinjapan said:
There have been several political scientists, authors, and skeptics who have formulated their own opinions as to why significant percentages of the American and international public give creedence to conspiracy theories.
Click to expand...

Well, americans do have a tendency (and ample ability) to get commercial'esque about... alot, hence the abundance of 'movements' formed over every little thing.
 
triforcharity said:
Ok, let me spell this out for you.

The ijackers has taken control of the plane. Their intention is to crash their hijacked plane at a specific target, and die as a martyr.

They passengers have figured out their plot, and are starting to revolt.

They are attempting to enter the cockpit.

What is the best choice and still have some mission success?

Do you:

A) continue on towards your original intended target, and risk the passengers breaching the cockpit door and stopping your plans all together, or;

B) Crash the plane into the ground, assuring your martyr status, and killing everyone else on board?

Which one would seem more logical there Red?
Click to expand...
What about the possibility that the passengers did manage to breach the cockpit, and accidentally flew the plane into the ground in their struggle with the hijackers?

And I say this with little flight knowledge. I know what Ground Effect is, but I don't know if it's possible to accidentally hit the joystick or whatever they use. :)
 
Last edited:
From what I recall, the evidence points to the passengers not breaching the cockpit.
 
RedIbis said:
And again, an absolutely perfect example of how the myth precedes reality. The CVR recordings are not a matter of public record, nor are they available for "all to see."

Granted, we would expect as much, but if you do the slightest bit of research you will find that the recordings were played only once at the Moussaui trial and only a transcript was provided by the FBI. An FBI transcript without any possibility of independent verification is hardly evidence.
Click to expand...

LOL. Your chronic denialism is very amusing Red, precisely because it is so desperately silly.

As a matter of fact, by the very definition of 'public record' both the CVR and FDR are very much public. You are completely wrong, of course.

A simple demonstration of how very wrong you are on all your points is this report by Neil Lewis of the New York Times.

A NYTimes reporter was in the courtroom and heard the CVR recording, along with any other witnesses who were there that day. This completely debunks your false claim that they are not in the public record.

Your denials are identical in nature to the protestations of Obama Birthers, who insist that he wasn't born in the US, even when shown a picture of his 'certificate of live birth'.
Another parallel to the mind-numbing stupidity of 9/11 Truth is found amongst Republicans, some '41% thought he [Obama] was foreign-born and the remaining 27% were unsure'. (Public Policy poll, 2009)

You see, his place of birth has apparently not been 'independently' verified, it is just part of the 'official story'.

Stupidity and stubbornness, what a tragic combination. :p
 
Last edited:
RedIbis said:
And again, an absolutely perfect example of how the myth precedes reality. The CVR recordings are not a matter of public record, nor are they available for "all to see."

Granted, we would expect as much, but if you do the slightest bit of research you will find that the recordings were played only once at the Moussaui trial and only a transcript was provided by the FBI. An FBI transcript without any possibility of independent verification is hardly evidence.
Click to expand...
I got a copy; makes it public record. Over 9 years and you still need help.

Oops, the ATC transmissions match the CVR transcript. The dumb terrorists pushed the wrong button. This is like verification. Darn, you were trying to say the FBI faked 911, but ATC/FAA saved the day. Double Darn, your made up ideas on 911 are failing due to lack of evidence.
 
Red and his ilk also fail to account for these public recordings from Air Traffic Control (ETA: ATC - Beachnut beat me to it), where the Mayday calls were made repeatedly by the cockpit crew, then an Arabic-tinged voice, apparently Ziad Jarrah's, announces '"Ladies and gentlemen: here the captain, please sit down and keep remaining seating. We have a bomb on board. So sit'

Just like the Obama Birthers, 9/11 Truthers must deny all this evidence as well. Tragically stupid reaction to an real American tragedy.

 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom