• 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.

How do truthers explain the phone calls?

dannyb said:
...<snip>... I've only been on this site a short while, but your posts read like parodies at times.
Click to expand...

That's because bs is trolling, nothing more.

Anyway, to answer the question in the title: usually very poorly.
 
bill smith said:
Well I think that flight 93 was under remote control actually Dash. When it landed in Cleveland it was rushed to a secure area where the lack of passengers would not be seen. The local mayor confirmed on TV that morning that 93 had landed at Cleveland
Click to expand...
No it didn't bill, that was Delta 1989. Humans can't be mistaken huh bill?

What happened to the passengers whose remains were found in Shanksville? I know you like to remove yourself from "the emotional side" but that doesn't mean you have to deny their existence.
 
Dash80 said:
No it didn't bill, that was Delta 1989. Humans can't be mistaken huh bill? What happened to the passengers whose remains were found in Shanksville? I know you like to remove yourself from "the emotional side" but that doesn't mean you have to deny their existence.
Click to expand...

Yes, I totally deny it, There were no bodies at Shanksville. There was no 757 either. Just some scattered debris that was planted along with some hijacker identification on top along with one of their bandanas.
 
bill smith said:
Yes, I totally deny it, There were no bodies at Shanksville. There was no 757 either. Just some scattered debris that was planted along with some hijacker identification on top along with one of their bandanas.
Click to expand...
I owe you an apology bill, I forgot you were a VicSimmer. Yes I suppose it would be easy to dismiss the emotional side, when you don't believe these people existed. :mad:
 
dannyb said:
Surely, this is one of the most damning pieces of evidence against their position: witnesses giving a live account of a plane hijacking. Now I know some of them have tried to explain this with voice generation apparatus but, surely, the more sensible truthers (if that's not a contradiction of terms) will know that you can't generate characteristics, personal information etc. without significant pre-background of someone.

So, how did they manage to simulate a hijacking to which people bore witness on the 'real' planes, whilst the 'fake' planes hit the buildings? How, also, did they get the timing just right for Betty Ong's call to cut off as flight 11 hit the North Tower?

Thanks.
Click to expand...

Well there's a couple of things I can say. First the hijackings could have been real. To get the phone calls CVR's..etc..etc. Planes landed some passengers quickly herded off into a military plane, original plane disposed of in some way. Seems far fetched, but it's possible.

But listen to this phone call of Ceecee lyles, one of the few that is actually recorded. The author of this video enhanced the audio, and the results are extremely disturbing. I've downloaded this audio myself and played around with it, but couldn't get it any better than he did. I agree with most of what the author says except for a few points. He thinks at the end it is the male voice breaking in again, I think it's just an attempt at (for lack of a better word) "weepiness" Also after the phone call is supposed to end, the author of the video, has the voices saying "it was great" "sorry" and then again "it was great" I think the voices are saying "You were great" "Howard" and than non disembodied but faint you can hear "testing...testing" gave me chills the first time I heard it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2bnPmyUUEjg
 
tmd2_1 said:
Well there's a couple of things I can say. First the hijackings could have been real. To get the phone calls CVR's..etc..etc. Planes landed some passengers quickly herded off into a military plane, original plane disposed of in some way. Seems far fetched, but it's possible.

But listen to this phone call of Ceecee lyles, one of the few that is actually recorded. The author of this video enhanced the audio, and the results are extremely disturbing. I've downloaded this audio myself and played around with it, but couldn't get it any better than he did. I agree with most of what the author says except for a few points. He thinks at the end it is the male voice breaking in again, I think it's just an attempt at (for lack of a better word) "weepiness" Also after the phone call is supposed to end, the author of the video, has the voices saying "it was great" "sorry" and then again "it was great" I think the voices are saying "You were great" "Howard" and than non disembodied but faint you can hear "testing...testing" gave me chills the first time I heard it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2bnPmyUUEjg
Click to expand...
I think you need your ears testing.
 
bill smith said:
On the 'Conspiracy Roadshow' last week an audio expert demonstrated voice morphing technology. I assume his gear was nowhere near as advanced as what the military might have- yet he was still able to record a sample of one of the female participants, type in a sentence of his own choosing and play it back. You would never have known that it was not the girl herself speaking.
Click to expand...

Did they carry out a conversation? You might fool someone with one line but to carry out a conversation you would need thousands of voice samples and a supercomputer and even then it would be unlikely to be successful. Humans are very good at detecting and recognizing subtleties in peoples voices.

Nope its just another insane twoofer fantasy. Why bother with the calls at all, they just add complexity to the plot and no one would be surprised at there being no calls from the planes. The planes actions alone make it quite clear they have been hijacked so whats to gain?? This is as silly as TMDs "missile"
 
sheeplesnshills said:
That video is disgusting. I've flagged it for review.:mad:
Click to expand...

I agree it is disgusting. But not for the reasons you think. It's disgusting how little people know about it. Does it "prove" anything, no, but it is awfully suspicious. I know the common response to things like this, is I'm disrespecting Ceecee's grave. Nothing is further from the truth, I'm trying to find out what really happened to her, and the other almost 3000 victims. This of course is assuming something other than the official story is the truth. I can't see how her family would have any problem with it. If I'm wrong, no real disservice is done, who would be against investigating something further?
 
Dash80 said:
I owe you an apology bill, I forgot you were a VicSimmer. Yes I suppose it would be easy to dismiss the emotional side, when you don't believe these people existed. :mad:
Click to expand...

You often refer to victim simulation (vicsim) Dash. If you are so desperate to talk about it why not start a new thread or resurrrect an old one ? We can talk about it. Should I hold my breath ?
 
Last edited:
sheeplesnshills said:
Did they carry out a conversation? You might fool someone with one line but to carry out a conversation you would need thousands of voice samples and a supercomputer and even then it would be unlikely to be successful. Humans are very good at detecting and recognizing subtleties in peoples voices.

Nope its just another insane twoofer fantasy. Why bother with the calls at all, they just add complexity to the plot and no one would be surprised at there being no calls from the planes. The planes actions alone make it quite clear they have been hijacked so whats to gain?? This is as silly as TMDs "missile"
Click to expand...

Having seen the voice morphing technology in action (and a fairly primitive version at that) I don't think it's beyond the bounds of possibility that a lapdog could speak into a phone and have the voice of a passenger come out the other end. They would need a powerful computer and a lot of voice samples. They might even make little mistakes like accidentally giving their full name to a close loved one. Remember the passenger on flight 93 ? 'Hi Mom, it's Mark Bingham here'

It could go a bit like this. Lapdog: Okay who's next on the list then ? Um....Mark Bingham. (punches number) Ring ring.ring ring..."Hello''....'Hi Mom, it's Mark Bingham here'.. Get the point ?
 
Last edited:
tmd2_1 said:
I agree it is disgusting. But not for the reasons you think. It's disgusting how little people know about it. Does it "prove" anything, no, but it is awfully suspicious.
Click to expand...

No its not. Its not even remotely suspicious.

I know the common response to things like this, is I'm disrespecting Ceecee's grave. Nothing is further from the truth, I'm trying to find out what really happened to her, and the other almost 3000 victims.
Click to expand...

We know what happened to her. You don't but thats your problem not ours.

This of course is assuming something other than the official story is the truth.
Click to expand...

Why would you assume that???? on the basis of that recording? a lady saying goodbye to her family when she knows she is likely to die???

[/I can't see how her family would have any problem with it. If I'm wrong, no real disservice is done, who would be against investigating something further?
Click to expand...

Would you like retarded mental cases bothering you?
Click to expand...
 
"Having seen the voice morphing technology in action (and a fairly primitive version at that) I don't think it's beyond the bounds of possibility that a lapdog could speak into a phone and have the voice of a passenger come out the other end. They would need a powerful computer and a lot of voice samples. They might even make little mistakes like accidentally giving their full name to a close loved one. Remember the passenger on flight 93 ? 'Hi Mom, it's Mark Bingham here'"


LOL I make those computers............so no, its not possible. and if they could make a mistake why couldn't a passenger under extreme strain? If you are on the phone all the time and leaving message frequently you would normally say exactly that.

you have of course a link to that "assertion" and why would they have the computer programmed with his surname if they knew "he" was phoning his Mom? They are so brilliant yet so incompetent at the same time?
 
dannyb said:
Surely, this is one of the most damning pieces of evidence against their position: witnesses giving a live account of a plane hijacking. Now I know some of them have tried to explain this with voice generation apparatus but, surely, the more sensible truthers (if that's not a contradiction of terms) will know that you can't generate characteristics, personal information etc. without significant pre-background of someone.

So, how did they manage to simulate a hijacking to which people bore witness on the 'real' planes, whilst the 'fake' planes hit the buildings? How, also, did they get the timing just right for Betty Ong's call to cut off as flight 11 hit the North Tower?

Thanks.
Click to expand...
RADAR track stopped, Betty Ong stops talking, people see plane impact the same time. It requires logic, 911 truth has no logic.

911 truth can't comprehend RADAR data tracking the plane from take off to impact.
911 Truth can't comprehend real people boarded the plane tracked by RADAR from takeoff to impact.
A phone call will not be real to those dumb enough to mention voice morphing and fall for insane claims.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom