• 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.

"Consensus 9/11: The Best Evidence" - O RLY?

pgimeno said:
I know the answer to that question: the truthers would have claimed that it is very strange that the pilots could squawk that code in a situation where the cabin was being invaded, being a situation of distress as per the AIM manual, and that they should have used the MAYDAY procedure instead, and that that's a reason to cast doubts about the official version.
Click to expand...

Casting doubt doesn't change anything though. What happened, happened.

REDIBIS -
What would have changed had they put in the code?
 
NoahFence said:
Casting doubt doesn't change anything though. What happened, happened.
Click to expand...
I know, you know, most people in this forum know. Now try to explain that to the Consensus 9/11 non-expert panelists. Or to RedIbis, for the matter.
 
RedIbis said:
You've convinced me. Clearly, that's not enough time to enter a four digit code.
Click to expand...
Time needed to assess the situation + time needed to input the emergency code once the judgment call is made. What takes longer?
 
RedIbis said:
You've convinced me. Clearly, that's not enough time to enter a four digit code.
Click to expand...
Bull flops. It is more than enough time to enter the code. Where your line of reason ing goes into the toilet is on the issue of a starting time for the procedure.

It is bloody unlikely that the pilots had any idea what was happening when they heard the first wierd noise. Maybe they lost ten seconds right there.

By that time, the hijackers were probably in the cockpit. Okay, they have twenty seconds to enter the code.

Problem is that, in an OH **** scenario, people tend to forget the contrived responce and just do what they think is going to save their lives immediately. This is more likely going to appear to involve fighting off the intruders than playing with the electronics in the cockpit.

Twoofers need to get some real-life experience.
 
Has Griffin, or RedIbis, concluded anything from their observation that the pilots did not enter 7500 even though they might have had 30 seconds to do it? How does that change the overall story of 9/11?

Does it mean the planes were not taken over by terrorist pilots? If that is their conclusion, then what - did someone fly the planes into buildings or not? There is a big fat tail to that story that someone needs to tell.

Would RedIbis be so kind and tell us what he thinks happened most likely on 9/11, if terrorists did not take out the airline pilots and fly planes into buildings and a field in Penn.?
 
Oystein said:
Would RedIbis be so kind and tell us what he thinks happened most likely on 9/11, if terrorists did not take out the airline pilots and fly planes into buildings and a field in Penn.?
Click to expand...

Even though it's been brought to your attention multiple times, you still pull out the old 'what really happened' gambit?
 
RedIbis said:
Even though it's been brought to your attention multiple times, you still pull out the old 'what really happened' gambit?
Click to expand...

Sorry. I forgot that truthers are not interested in "what really happened". Truth is greater than reality, right? Reality is for whimps.
 
Oystein said:
Does it mean the planes were not taken over by terrorist pilots? If that is their conclusion, then what - did someone fly the planes into buildings or not? There is a big fat tail to that story that someone needs to tell.
Click to expand...
I think that their line of reasoning goes like this: «This proves that the official story is false, therefore we demand a new investigation».
 
I thought we "knew" that flight 93 was diverted safely to Cleveland while some bombs were set off in a crater and some debris thrown around for looks? The passengers were killed in Cleveland and buried at sea.

:rolleyes: :hypnotize

ETA: I notice the consensus panel has returned to the "shot down" claim, which apparently involves TPTB randomly choosing an innocent plane and shooting it from the sky so they could have a good story about passengers saving the day....
 
Last edited:
ozeco41 said:
It's simply a new slant on trolling.

They publish old and dealt with many times claims (not the alleged "evidence") which can lead to round in circles discussion. Sure pure trolling as per several regular members here. The aim is ensure that no outcomes are reached, no decisions taken and doing so by any level of dishonesty required.

The reality is that all these published 13 claims go to matters already resolved to the satisfaction of reasoning honest people. In fact to the satisfaction of the "reasonable person" of legal lore. (The "man on the Clapham omnibus" for those familiar with the British legal tradition.)

So the initiative is not intended to progress any search for truth (veracity - the dictionary meaning before the truth movement bastardised the word.)

Rather it is simply another scheme to ensure no progress of discussion.

Trolling...:)

...and there will be many who choose to feed the trolls :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Quoting for ... well, Truth. Anyone wasting their time engaging the sad remnants of the Truth movement here has to accept that progress towards a goal is not their objective. It's been ten years, and RedIbis can't conceive of a plausible hypothesis. There is a reason for that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom