Merged Continuation - 9/11 CT subforum General Discussion Thread

[DGM]

Didn't say it was the only one omitted. Not sure if he actually said that..sorry if I gave that impression. You can look at the DOD releases...and compare them to all of his photos. Look at the links I gave it is all there.

Kind of spoils all that suspicion. Looks like way too many people out and about (and too calm) for 5 min after the attack. Any reason it couldn't be say half hour. Smoke looks right.

 

[tmd2_1]

Kind of spoils all that suspicion. Looks like way too many people out and about (and too calm) for 5 min after the attack. Any reason it couldn't be say half hour. Smoke looks right.

Take a look at the whole collection...you'll be able to piece together about what time it was from other photos.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YL4djGUcMOg

 

[DGM]

Take a look at the whole collection...you'll be able to piece together about what time it was from other photos.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YL4djGUcMOg

Why does the pictures start at 9:45 and PFT claim the picture was taken 3 to 5 min after the attack. 9:45 is 8 min. after the attack for the first picture. You didn't notice that?

 

[BStrong]

I am outta here. Rarely have I seen someone defend so much utter stupidy with such stubbornness.

Good night.

There is a reason why I no longer engage 911 truthers in serious discussion.

This thread is a good example.

"Truth" covers it's ears and eyes and runs from the room when "truthers" put forth their nonsense.

 

[tfk]

tmd,

Do you really think that nobody noticed that you addressed not one of the provable, demonstrable facts that I posted regarding molten steel?

This is the "Twoofer Way". Sucks to go thru life as an intellectual coward.

Let me address your last point...i don't want to give my age..but i am not kid I can assure you of that.

Sorry, you're a kid. Regardless of what year you were born, your epistemology is stuck at "16 years old punk".

I do take that advice which is why I don't associate with John Gross...spin it anyway you like...it takes 10 seconds to find these videos, I would like to think the person who is charged with finding out what happened at the greatest crime scene in U.S. history would be interested in what eye witnesses said. He is either lying or so grossly negligent he should be removed from his position.

Gross is a wildly successful engineer.

He correctly addresses engineering facts. Not baseless amateur opinions.

Did you look at jon cole's videos? Don't like his results think he and Gage are quacks and liars, do exactly what Cole said. Prove him wrong by experiment.

Why don't you state what you think that Jon Cole proved that pertains to 9/11.

There is precisely zero possibility that the contraptions that Cole describes could have been used at the WTC.

Jon Cole is a clueless incompetent.

Do you want absolute proof of this? Here it is: He's a member of AE911T.

No additional proof is necessary.

Until then there's not much else to say.

Finally, you said something right.

You have nothing much to say.

There is not one single new argument, new fact, new anything that you've brought to the table.

Not one.

Same S***, Different Shoveler.

Waste of time & bandwidth.

 

[tmd2_1]

Why does the pictures start at 9:45 and PFT claim the picture was taken 3 to 5 min after the attack. 9:45 is 8 min. after the attack for the first picture. You didn't notice that?

Well aware of that.. if you scroll down there's actually a guy that corrects the original poster... 5-7 minutes...8 minutes...I mean I'm not going to get all worked up about that. I hope you don't let something like that get in the way of this...I mean we're still talking about him going on TV saying he was in one place (don't forget about the absurdity of that in general)...and a photo clearly places him somewhere else at that time.

 

[tmd2_1]

tmd,

Do you really think that nobody noticed that you addressed not one of the provable, demonstrable facts that I posted regarding molten steel?

This is the "Twoofer Way". Sucks to go thru life as an intellectual coward.



Sorry, you're a kid. Regardless of what year you were born, your epistemology is stuck at "16 years old punk".



Gross is a wildly successful engineer.

He correctly addresses engineering facts. Not baseless amateur opinions.



Why don't you state what you think that Jon Cole proved that pertains to 9/11.

There is precisely zero possibility that the contraptions that Cole describes could have been used at the WTC.

Jon Cole is a clueless incompetent.

Do you want absolute proof of this? Here it is: He's a member of AE911T.

No additional proof is necessary.



Finally, you said something right.

You have nothing much to say.

There is not one single new argument, new fact, new anything that you've brought to the table.

Not one.

Same S***, Different Shoveler.

Waste of time & bandwidth.

Brilliant counter arguments, basically just saying I am an idiot. This is the last time I will say this, watch Cole's videos, he discusses many elements of 911...don't like what he says prove him wrong by experiment. I look forward to your video.

 

[DGM]

Well aware of that.. if you scroll down there's actually a guy that corrects the original poster... 5-7 minutes...8 minutes...I mean I'm not going to get all worked up about that. I hope you don't let something like that get in the way of this...I mean we're still talking about him going on TV saying he was in one place (don't forget about the absurdity of that in general)...and a photo clearly places him somewhere else at that time.

How does the photo "clearly place him" if you don't actually know the time? I have no doubt the guy could have embellished his story. You're not hard to convince when you like the story, huh?

Personally I could throw his whole story out, It doesn't really matter. You might be surprised to learn but, there were hundreds of people involved in cleaning up after the attacks. There's also lots of pictures of the plane and DNA from the passengers. This little tid-bit is just that.

 

[tmd2_1]

How does the photo "clearly place him" if you don't actually know the time? I have no doubt the guy could have embellished his story. You're not hard to convince when you like the story, huh?

Personally I could throw his whole story out, It doesn't really matter. You might be surprised to learn but, there were hundreds of people involved in cleaning up after the attacks. There's also lots of pictures of the plane and DNA from the passengers. This little tid-bit is just that.

Never said there was no crash...simply said I don't know what happened and I have questions. This guy along with many other pieces of evidence is why I think that.

Hence why I said the most plausible scenario...is there was a rather large Operation Northwoods type of plan, at the pentagon...the more sinister plan..took advantage of this and launched their attack in New York. Did this happen I don't know, but I think it puts everything together.

 

[dafydd]

Never said there was no crash...simply said I don't know what happened and I have questions. This guy along with many other pieces of evidence is why I think that.

Hence why I said the most plausible scenario...is there was a rather large Operation Northwoods type of plan, at the pentagon...the more sinister plan..took advantage of this and launched their attack in New York. Did this happen I don't know, but I think it puts everything together.

Only in your fevered imagination. You are quite right,you don't know what happened.

 

[DGM]

Never said there was no crash...simply said I don't know what happened and I have questions. This guy along with many other pieces of evidence is why I think that.

Hence why I said the most plausible scenario...is there was a rather large Operation Northwoods type of plan, at the pentagon...the more sinister plan..took advantage of this and launched their attack in New York. Did this happen I don't know, but I think it puts everything together.

What exactly is it "evidence" of? Is this guy a plant to prove a plane hit? He's not needed. How about Loyd? Was his statements important to explain what happened?

The answers, no. Years latter after all the radar data and such was collected, it was known where the plane hit (not to mention the physical evidence), irregardless of how people remember it.

 

[tmd2_1]

What exactly is it "evidence" of? Is this guy a plant to prove a plane hit? He's not needed. How about Loyd? Was his statements important to explain what happened?

The answers, no. Years latter after all the radar data and such was collected, it was known where the plane hit (not to mention the physical evidence), irregardless of how people remember it.

Could be a plant...trying to sell the lie. I wasn't apart of the plot...I don't know what the intent would be. Lloyde's words speak for themselves. You know when he says it was planned, and the rich people this is their thing. That he's not suppose to be in it..but he is.

 

[beachnut]

I can add no more to what I already wrote. I'll trust that the Washington Post talked to Aviation sources and they said the plane was flown with extraordinary skill. Have a problem...talk to them.

They were wrong. If you looked at the FDR you could figure out you are spreading lies because you don't check what people tell you. Why can't you do your own research, you spread hearsay, lies and fantasy.

 

[tfk]

I can't prove it...but ...

The litany of things that you can't prove, and have offered zero evidence to support, is ...

... every point you've attempted (& failed) to make.

The only things you have to offer are incredulity and innuendo.

You're merely the most recent of a long line of truthers to do the same.

Get a different hobby, kid. You're no good at this one.

 

[tmd2_1]

The litany of things that you can't prove, and have offered zero evidence to support, is ...

... every point you've attempted (& failed) to make.

The only things you have to offer are incredulity and innuendo.

You're merely the most recent of a long line of truthers to do the same.

Get a different hobby, kid. You're no good at this one.

Thanks for advice...let me know when the video is ready.

 

[000063]

Let me try and answer these.
1. Sure it possible...he said he was outside his car for 15 to minutes I would assume he meant on the road. More importantly he said he was with his girlfriend driving into work. I don't see anyone there that could possibly be his girlfriend.

Therefore, she doesn't exist, right?

2. I have no idea..the guy just disappeared...no one has ever been able to find any record of him

Let's throw up some possibilities;
1. The bad guys Got To him.
2. He decided not to profit off of others misfortune.
3. He was lying.
4. Realized he had committed a crime and laid low.

Since we don't have evidence, all of those are equally plausible.

3 I took it he meant in the road as I said in part 1.

Which road? Of the metric tonne of roads around the Pentagon, which was he on, and what was his approximate location?

Why would he do those things? I mean go to the annex at all? Why would he lie about where he was at. Sure he could pick up a piece of evidence...but that is a crime...a crime. Nothing was ever done about this, he just dropped off the face of the earth. Proof positive of anything or course not...just one more thing to add to an awful lot of other evidence.

It's not evidence of anything! He could've been telling the truth, he could've been lying, or he could've been wrong. Without more information, any conclusion would be premature.

As I said Boeing's suspicious comment that for national security reasons they can't comment on 175. The fact that those planes were maxed out speed wise, but were still able to hit those buildings square, and level. Not pointed up or down. Hit in such a way that not even the slightest bit of the wing hit nothing but the building...ie if it didn't parts of the plane would have flown to the ground. Is it hard evidence? No, but a fair amount of circumstantial.

Uh, I'm not sure about the elevation, tilt, yaw, etc., but someone mentioned that 77's wings hit the ground. If you meant at the point of contact, the Pentagon is a giant target. The wingspan of the plane was 38.05 metres. The length of the Pentagon is 281 m. It would've been remarkably difficult to miss it, IMO.

And again, nothing but incredulity. Your own uninformed opinion, which gives you carte blanche to ignore people who know what they're talking about.

I did see post #5. There is evidence to it...and it is plausible..Believe what you want...opening yourself up to the possibility of alternative theories is not easy...you seem like a nice guy...maybe you will be able to do it one day.

There's a difference between your mealy-mouthed doublespeak about being "open to the possibility of alternative theories" and actually proving one viable. None of them are. Not a one.

If I'm open to the possibility of Burger King for lunch, and I go to McDonald's, does that mean I didn't consider BK at all? No, it doesn't.

I love how you are still categorically incapable of answering which of two scenarios is more likely. Not some third scenario, just two. Like being asked whether you would rather go to BK or McD's for lunch, and you keep answering Wendy's. Wendy's is across town, your co-workers respond. BK and McD are right here. Wendy's, you reply adamantly. We are not going to Wendy's, we'll never make it back in time. Burger King or McDonald's? Wendy's!, you cry. Then they say screw it and leave you behind.

Welcome to ignore.

 

[beachnut]

As I said Boeing's suspicious comment that for national security reasons they can't comment on 175. The fact that those planes were maxed out speed wise, but were still able to hit those buildings square, and level. Not pointed up or down. Hit in such a way that not even the slightest bit of the wing hit nothing but the building...ie if it didn't parts of the plane would have flown to the ground. Is it hard evidence? No, but a fair amount of circumstantial.

More nonsense.

The wing span of a 767 is? 156 feet
The width of the WTC is? Min width for impact 207 feet, the darn building was 1300 foot tall or what? A very large target, my distant great uncle would pick up handkerchiefs with his wing tip, how could anyone miss the WTC towers?
BTW, Flt 175 did not hit square and level, you did not watch the video. You don't do your own research.

Parts of the planes were all over the area where they crashed. What are you talking about? Some crashed through the WTC and were ejected to the ground.

 

[tmd2_1]

Therefore, she doesn't exist, right?

Let's throw up some possibilities;
1. The bad guys Got To him.
2. He decided not to profit off of others misfortune.
3. He was lying.
4. Realized he had committed a crime and laid low.

Since we don't have evidence, all of those are equally plausible.

Which road? Of the metric tonne of roads around the Pentagon, which was he on, and what was his approximate location?

It's not evidence of anything! He could've been telling the truth, he could've been lying, or he could've been wrong. Without more information, any conclusion would be premature.

Uh, I'm not sure about the elevation, tilt, yaw, etc., but someone mentioned that 77's wings hit the ground. If you meant at the point of contact, the Pentagon is a giant target. The wingspan of the plane was 38.05 metres. The length of the Pentagon is 281 m. It would've been remarkably difficult to miss it, IMO.

And again, nothing but incredulity. Your own uninformed opinion, which gives you carte blanche to ignore people who know what they're talking about.

There's a difference between your mealy-mouthed doublespeak about being "open to the possibility of alternative theories" and actually proving one viable. None of them are. Not a one.

If I'm open to the possibility of Burger King for lunch, and I go to McDonald's, does that mean I didn't consider BK at all? No, it doesn't.

I love how you are still categorically incapable of answering which of two scenarios is more likely. Not some third scenario, just two. Like being asked whether you would rather go to BK or McD's for lunch, and you keep answering Wendy's. Wendy's is across town, your co-workers respond. BK and McD are right here. Wendy's, you reply adamantly. We are not going to Wendy's, we'll never make it back in time. Burger King or McDonald's? Wendy's!, you cry. Then they say screw it and leave you behind.

Welcome to ignore.

I was talking about the planes that hit the buildings square. I provided more evidence, more sources then everyone else on this thread combined (pertaining to what's in this thread alone) I provided evidence to hani's poor flying ability along with evidence that what he "did" took a fair amount of skill. I provided my own reasons as to why hitting the WTC the way they did...would be quite hard. I never said any of this was impossible. You definitely seem incapable of changing your thoughts, and ruthlessly attack anyone that shows problems with your dogma. There is no doubt I have frustrated, stumped, and is some cases infuriated some members here. Why? Because I provided evidence that is in direct contradiction of their dogma. I didn't back down from anyone...called people out on their crap, you know the ones who think they are simply brilliant, but most importantly I stayed with facts and assumptions based on evidence. Being on your ignore list..is just about the highest form of a compliment anyone could pay me.

 

[dafydd]

I was talking about the planes that hit the buildings square. I provided more evidence, more sources then everyone else on this thread combined (pertaining to what's in this thread alone) I provided evidence to hani's poor flying ability along with evidence that what he "did" took a fair amount of skill. I provided my own reasons as to why hitting the WTC the way they did...would be quite hard. I never said any of this was impossible. You definitely seem incapable of changing your thoughts, and ruthlessly attack anyone that shows problems with your dogma. There is no doubt I have frustrated, stumped, and is some cases infuriated some members here. Why? Because I provided evidence that is in direct contradiction of their dogma. I didn't back down from anyone...called people out on their crap, you know the ones who think they are simply brilliant, but most importantly I stayed with facts and assumptions based on evidence. Being on your ignore list..is just about the highest form of a compliment anyone could pay me.

You have proved nothing.

 

[tmd2_1]

They were wrong. If you looked at the FDR you could figure out you are spreading lies because you don't check what people tell you. Why can't you do your own research, you spread hearsay, lies and fantasy.

Why don't you give me some tips...perhaps you can tell me where you learned 175 went down near Pittsburgh. That was no type-o you made the same mistake twice. Or perhaps you can teach where you learned the skills where I literally had to tell where to find the word Sulfur. I mean these things could really help me.