• Due to ongoing issues caused by Search, it has been temporarily disabled
  • Please excuse the mess, we're moving the furniture and restructuring the forum categories

Matt Nelson: 9/11 Debris - An Investigation of Ground Zero

rubygray said:
Of course from this location and height, nor can it possibly have hit the ground floor of the Pentagon half a second after crossing Route 27.
Click to expand...

How so? What was its speed? We've already proven that your ghost image of a "watermark" left by a "whistleblower" is pure drivel. A plan can not move that slow. That "watermark" and "whistleblower" are as tangible as the plane is in that picture. It does not exists and only does so because your imagination conjures it to be so.
 
massive ignorance is required to ignore Radar, FDR, and DNA

rubygray said:
... The unanimous testimony of many witnesses, far more than Craig and Aldo ever interviewed, is that the plane flew on the North-of-Citgo flightpath. Lloyde England is one of those witnesses, and video of him and his cab beside the cemetery retaining wall at 9:41 a.m. is conclusive evidence that Arab hijackers did not fly that plane into the Pentagon. ...
Click to expand...

Radar proves you have been fooled by the idiots CIT, and are gullible. You have no evidence.

The FDR is proof a novice pilot (albeit a FAA certified pilot) flew Flight 77 into the Pentagon - and you can't comprehend science, physics, FDR, Radar, and reality based evidence.

What causes your gullibility to believe liars like CIT? In CIT videos the witnesses are pointing to the official flight path, which you can't figure out.
 
rubygray said:
You have not read any of my original post (on LetsRollForums) where I have stated that this looks like a watermark image, and I suggest that it could have been a whistleblower's clue, left in the image in this all-but invisible form. The FBI after all, did have this footage in their possession for several years.
I have never suggested there was any "cloaking technology" involved. That is your invention, nothing to do with me.
I first noticed this phenomenon when watching the looped Gatecam footage, unedited, and the successive images were very obvious to me.
It was only after seeing the same shape moving from right to left, that I started to enhance the individual frames.
You are just guessing and speculating here, and making crazy evaluations of my character with your "Shameful" comment. You are way off base.

I illustrate what I write about, for the benefit of others like yourself who have not spent the many hours of study that I have. If i just wrote without accompanying images, you would of course complain about that.

I have never "accused the firefighters of being in on it". Where did you get this fanciful notion?

Why would you say that I "accuse the victims of being actors"?

My purpose is basically to vindicate the integrity of one victim in particular, LLOYDE ENGLAND the taxi driver, whose windshield and cab interior was smashed by a pole as the plane flew across him. Lloyde has been mercilessly criticised and condemned by all sides for 19 years now, especially thanks to the shoddy work done in his case by Citizen Investigation Team. They are the ones who created this mess by claiming that Lloyde was an accomplice in the Pentagon crime.

I, almost the only person on this planet it seems, take the unpopular stance that Lloyde told the truth and nothing but the truth AS HE KNEW IT, while admitting that there were many things he could not explain about that day. Strange things happened to him, but that is no reason to accuse him of being old (he was the same age as Rumsfeld, and nobody complained that he was too old to be 2IC of the country) and forgetful and confused and senile. It is certainly not a reason to accuse him of lying, or of being actively involved in a treasonous plot of any kind.

I do this not just to support the true story told by Lloyde England, but because of the many victims who died that day, and as a corollary to that day, and also for the millions of sufferers on foreign soils in the succeeding years.

As for "experts covering up mass murders" ... well this has always happened throughout history which should not be news to anyone. That is the nature of war.

The fact that Donald Rumsfeld's bodyguard was actively involved in transporting Lloyde England to the overpass bridge and guarding him during the photo session which deceived the world into believing the lie that the plane flew diagonally across the bridge and hit 5 lightpoles, one of which speared Lloyde England's cab in that location
... and that this happened within about 15 minutes of the explosion,
with this bodyguard first having had to walk about 600 metres from Rumsfeld's office on the eastern side of the Pentagon, after being told about the impact,
and then folliwed his boss around the lawn for a few minutes
... and that all this is recorded on numerous videos and photos
... well this is just undeniable proof of involvement of the highest levels of government in the planning and execution of the Pentagon event, which necessarily proves that the entire event was staged.

The truth is that Lloyde England did not lie, and that he was indeed 400 yards north of the bridge on Route 27 when a pole smashed through his windshield, as he consistently maintained. Several videos and photos prove that he was not on the bridge until 18 minutes after the explosion, and that his cab was moved from the place where it was impaled, to the bridge, at 6 minutes after the explosion.

The unanimous testimony of many witnesses, far more than Craig and Aldo ever interviewed, is that the plane flew on the North-of-Citgo flightpath. Lloyde England is one of those witnesses, and video of him and his cab beside the cemetery retaining wall at 9:41 a.m. is conclusive evidence that Arab hijackers did not fly that plane into the Pentagon.

It is of course understandable that there should be such an outcry against this evidence, but derision and mockery is no substitute for rational discussion and explanation of how a plane that was, according to all the witnesses, flying hundreds of yards north of the bridge, and high enough to miss the tree-topped cemetery bank and overhead sign opposite the heliport, could possibly have knocked a lightpole from the bridge into Lloyde England's cab.

Of course from this location and height, nor can it possibly have hit the ground floor of the Pentagon half a second after crossing Route 27.
Click to expand...

None of this has anything to do with the thread subject, "An Investigation of Ground Zero". You should more accurately place this in your England thread.
 
beachnut said:
In CIT videos the witnesses are pointing to the official flight path, which you can't figure out.
Click to expand...

You really need to quit calling people names and making derogatory remarks about others. You are not as perfect as you imagine, and nor are others as witless and unqualified as you suppose, although we do not perpetually blow our own trumpets as you have been doing here for years.

Name a single one of CIT's eyewitnesses who points to the official flightpath, and provide images.

Then do the same for ALL of CIT's other eyewitnesses.

Then repeat the exercise for every one of ALL the other North-of-Citgo eyewitnesses that CIT missed.

I have an abundance of evidence. The reflected light flashing on the ceiling of the Citgo's north canopy at the time that the plane flew past it, is proof that the plane flew between the station and the cemetery, as so many eyewitnesses reported.
 
bknight said:
None of this has anything to do with the thread subject, "An Investigation of Ground Zero". You should more accurately place this in your England thread.
Click to expand...

Point taken and agreed, but this thread happens to be where the previous poster challenged me and made some glaring errors as to my statements and intentions.
Just setting the record straight as he appears not to be very familiar with the subject.
 
rubygray said:
You have not read any of my original post (on LetsRollForums) where I have stated that this looks like a watermark image, and I suggest that it could have been a whistleblower's clue, left in the image in this all-but invisible form. The FBI after all, did have this footage in their possession for several years.
Click to expand...
No, I didn't. When you converse with someone, you need to actually tell them what you're talking about. It doesn't help anyone here that you told someone else, on a different forum, what your point was. Humanity is not a hive mind.

I have never suggested there was any "cloaking technology" involved. That is your invention, nothing to do with me.
Click to expand...
:confused:

I never claimed you said anything about cloaking devices. It was a sarcastic remark because I found your idea of a cloud somehow being an airplane ridiculous.



I first noticed this phenomenon when watching the looped Gatecam footage, unedited, and the successive images were very obvious to me.
It was only after seeing the same shape moving from right to left, that I started to enhance the individual frames.
Click to expand...
I don't see the same shape move from right to left. I see a cloud or digital artifact in a series of screenshots full of artifacts. It does appear to move slightly to the left in the second image, but I don't see it in subsequent images.

You are just guessing and speculating here
Click to expand...
Really? The same kind of guesswork and speculation that makes someone think a cloud or digital artifact is a plane, and that it was photoshopped in (or partly hidden) by some whistleblower? That kind of speculation?

...and making crazy evaluations of my character with your "Shameful" comment. You are way off base.
Click to expand...
Possibly. You might have some noble reason to pour over images and decide through pareidolia that a cloud or artifact is a plane and that it must be left by some whistleblower to warn about some big conspiracy that's been thoroughly debunked 20 years ago. That's fine. It's just that I take 9/11 seriously -- I watched it live, a classmate of mine's best friend was on the first plane, and I've visited Ground Zero. It hit all of us who experienced it, either first hand or as residents of the United States, pretty hard.

That's why I've got extremely little patience for 9/11 conspiracy theorists. 3000 completely innocent tourists, businessmen, pilots, stewardesses, emergency responders, and office workers died that day. Countless more were injured or traumatized. Then there's the structural and economic damage, and the fallout through wars and polarization. The shameful way many Muslim Americans were treated in the months and years after the attack. The way the Bush administration exploited it for political gain, even to invade a country.

I just find it surpremely disrespectful to all the victims to treat this like some sort of mystery game. Which is essentially what you're doing when you refuse to listen to experts and documentation, and cling to some idea of a "conspiracy". For whatever good or bad reason. If you have the patience and dedication to look for airplanes in the clouds of security footage, you have the dedication to look at the facts of 9/11. There's just no excuse not to.

I illustrate what I write about, for the benefit of others like yourself who have not spent the many hours of study that I have. If i just wrote without accompanying images, you would of course complain about that.
Click to expand...
Again, the problem isn't the image, it's that you didn't tell us what you meant by it. Just dropping a link or image in a discussion is just mindless spamming.

I have never "accused the firefighters of being in on it". Where did you get this fanciful notion?

Why would you say that I "accuse the victims of being actors"?
Click to expand...
Never said you did. When I say "edge CTers" I'm referring to your guys as a whole.

And I know nothing about this cab driver Lloyd, but yes, there's contradictory eyewitness accounts. Always will be, since humans are terrible at remembering details correctly, especially in stressful or emotional situations. When determining which eyewitnesses to trust the most, you need to look at the physical evidence. The physical evidence backs up what you people call "the official story". This Lloyd person is/was probably a good person, but his testimony is not proof of a conspiracy.
 
rubygray said:
for the benefit of others like yourself who have not spent the many hours of study that I have.
Click to expand...

You know you have nothing when you have to misrepresent "I spent many hours watching youtube videos" as "spent many hours of study".

Nobody knows how many hours you actually spent (beside the fact that "high number of hours" does not equal "superior knowledge and/or more 'correct' knowledge"), so even bringing this up is useless.

For some odd reason, I hear the "Well, you disagree on my wild CT but I've spent so many more hours on this topic than you" way too often from CTs in real life.
 
rubygray said:
You really need to quit calling people names and making derogatory remarks about others. You are not as perfect as you imagine, and nor are others as witless and unqualified as you suppose, although we do not perpetually blow our own trumpets as you have been doing here for years.
Click to expand...
You spread the fantasy of a flyover, a lie based on willful ignornace. FDR proves it was 77 which impacted and damaged the Pentagon, found in the Pentagon, case closed, prove you lie and mock the murders at the hands of terrorists who flew the plane on purpose into the Pentagon. Your claims are based on BS, and failed investigation by CIT. Your denial of DNA, FDR, and Radar is evidence of your willful ignorance to spread the delusional lie of a flyover.

rubygray said:
Name a single one of CIT's eyewitnesses who points to the official flightpath, and provide images.
Click to expand...
All the CIT witnesses on video point to the official flight path. I have to assume you have no knowledge of the geography of the area, and are gullible to believe CIT delusional investigation. Have you been to the Pentagon area? Maybe you could study more, and avoid idiots like CIT.

rubygray said:
Then do the same for ALL of CIT's other eyewitnesses.
Click to expand...
I don't need witnesses, I have the FDR, Radar, which prove your claims are lies.


rubygray said:
Then repeat the exercise for every one of ALL the other North-of-Citgo eyewitnesses that CIT missed.
Click to expand...
There are no NoC witnesses, the FDR and Radar prove the actual flight path, and don't have to use witnesses. But you don't understand science, you prefer idiots like CIT failed interviews and failed analysis.

rubygray said:
I have an abundance of evidence. The reflected light flashing on the ceiling of the Citgo's north canopy at the time that the plane flew past it, is proof that the plane flew between the station and the cemetery, as so many eyewitnesses reported.
Click to expand...

Wrong! You ignore an abundance of evidence 77 impacted the Pentagon.

FDR and Radar prove you are spreading delusional lies. The DNA found in the Pentagon along the impact path of 77, prove you are a liar. DNA of the murdered passengers and crew, and the idiot terrorists DNA found in the Pentagon on the flight path impact damage, all save the small murdered kid you mock with BS and lies. Your posts are an abundance of evidence you have failed. No one saw a flyover.

As you give the terrorists, 19 failed humans, a pass on murdering thousands - as you lie about 9/11, unable to grasp reality, and putting all your money on an failed analysis of witnesses you can't figure out are pointing to the official flight path on video because you lack the knowledge of the area. Guess you have no clue what is north, and what is south.

What is the final course of Flight 77? You have no clue.
How did the passengers of Flight 77 end up in the Pentagon? You have no clue.
Why did the tower crew not see 77 flyover, the aircraft would have flown right over the airport next to the Pentagon? You have no clue.

Who did I call names? CIT are idiots, they can't figure out 77 hit the Pentagon, that is prove CIT are idiots.

Why do you lie, and ignore FDR, Radar, and DNA?

Why are you unable to debunk FDR, Radar, and DNA?

I saw CIT in action in the their videos and they have no clue how to investigate aircraft with respect to 9/11. They are not qualified to do an investigation, the same as you. Have you had any training, like aircraft accident investigation? Do you realize aircraft investigators in the USA are able to get the Radar data for all aircraft over the USA in a matter of hours or days? Do you have the FDR data? Do you realize the USA has rules on how citizens are able to get data?

Who did 9/11 in your fantasy world, where you think CIT did a valid investigation because you don't have the knowledge and experience to figure out the truth.

There is a jet fuel fireball at the Pentagon, caused by the fuel of 77 in the wings of 77 ignited by engines running at 100 percent at impact... how do you explain the jet fuel fireball exactly what would happen when a jet with the exact amount of fuel impacting at 483.5 knots, exactly what was recorded on the FDR of 77.

You can't explain the jet fuel fireball, and CIT could not. Your fake claims fail due to your shoddy research based on the most unreliable fodder from failed analysis of eye witnesses.
 
From questionitall at PFFFFT

Nov 5 2019, 08:21 PM

ADDENDUM
In my previous entry I stated "Mr. Nelson has since counterclaimed that Corley's chunk of fuselage wreckage "flew dead straight for about 500' then started dropping. It made it about 700' north just over the road between the Post Office and WTC7 then drifted with the wind back to WTC5."
That was an error on my part.
In fact it was the grandstanding pathological liar and provocateur Brian Foster (AKA waypastvne) who made that statement, and I will posting my full rebuttal of why everything he's said and claimed to date is patently false in the coming days.
Click to expand...


It's been a year since he posted this. He still hasn't posted his full rebuttal. I'm starting to think he doesn't have one.
 
waypastvne said:
From questionitall at PFFFFT




It's been a year since he posted this. He still hasn't posted his full rebuttal. I'm starting to think he doesn't have one.
Click to expand...

If you're interested in seeing what Dan is up to, here's a link:
"Rare 9/11 Facts" --- https://www.facebook.com/groups/133244961089953/

He emails me from time to time. I don't reply. Sorry, Dan.

I've recently added several more entries to the 911conspiracy.tv 2nd plane videos and photos lists. At the top of the pages I list/link the new ones:

http://911conspiracy.tv/2nd_hit.html -- 67 videos show the plane, so far.
http://911conspiracy.tv/2nd_hit_photos.html -- where a newly found high resolution version of an old pic (Nunez) shows the United livery more clearly. Officer Perez is still the best.
 
MattNelson said:
If you're interested in seeing what Dan is up to, here's a link:
"Rare 9/11 Facts" --- https://www.facebook.com/groups/133244961089953/

He emails me from time to time. I don't reply. Sorry, Dan. ...
Click to expand...
http://www.911conspiracy.tv/7_WTC.html

"""WTC Building 7 Demolition Video Collection"""

False labels, not a demolition, it was totaled by fire.


https://www.facebook.com/groups/133244961089953/media
The facebook page looks like a lot of woo. A lot of gullible people who fail to check the facts, and have no clue what counts as evidence.
 
From questionitall at PFFFFT

Nov 5 2019, 08:21 PM

ADDENDUM
In my previous entry I stated "Mr. Nelson has since counterclaimed that Corley's chunk of fuselage wreckage "flew dead straight for about 500' then started dropping. It made it about 700' north just over the road between the Post Office and WTC7 then drifted with the wind back to WTC5."
That was an error on my part.
In fact it was the grandstanding pathological liar and provocateur Brian Foster (AKA waypastvne) who made that statement, and I will posting my full rebuttal of why everything he's said and claimed to date is patently false in the coming days.
Click to expand...

2 years, still no full rebuttal.


And PFFFFFT is gone.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/cgi-sy...topic=22939&pid=10814572&mode=threaded&start=

RIP PFT.
 
Last edited:
website down

With my website 911conspiracy.tv now defunct, the archive.org Wayback Machine will have to suffice. My main page with links to the video archives and more is HERE.

The subject of this thread, my book 9/11 Debris, is HERE.

Collected WTC-area airplane parts are covered in THIS DOCUMENT, which is an expanded version of the airplane parts chapter in my book.
 
Orders of Magnitude - Physics - Math - Science ????

MattNelson said:
With my website 911conspiracy.tv now defunct, the archive.org Wayback Machine will have to suffice. My main page with links to the video archives and more is HERE.

The subject of this thread, my book 9/11 Debris, is HERE.

Collected WTC-area airplane parts are covered in THIS DOCUMENT, which is an expanded version of the airplane parts chapter in my book.
Click to expand...
So what caused the destruction at the WTC complex? Might want to try physics next edition.

???
All of the contents and floors of the towers falling through themselves did that? After all I've read and seen, I don't think so. Call it an argument from incredulity, fully realized.
Click to expand...

As the towers collapsed, the energy in each tower due to mass, gravity, and height, did all the damage as seen, which you deny?

Yes, fire also did a lot of destruction, as did each plane impacts...

however the plane impacts were equal in energy to 1400 and 2000 pounds of TNT or so, orders of magnitudes less than the energy of collapse of each tower = simple physics.

The energy of each tower collapse is equal to over 100 2,000 pound bombs... thus it is a "do think so" moment due to physics, high school physics.

Physics explain the destruction... there is no evidence to support "I don't think so"... no evidence.

Your book has some hearsay, opinions, and quote mining, not evidence to support, "I don't think so", another opinion, not science.

The references to "physic" in your book are related to nuts from 9/11 truth web sites and worse.

There is a lot of BS in the book, misinformation, etc, etc, etc... enough to mislead others for years to come
 
Oystein said:
That sucks :(
(And reminds us of the importance of doing backups)
Click to expand...

Ahmen, brother. I have had two crashes in my computer life.
The first destroyed all data and programs.
The second was worse and occurred during back up, both HD went down and corrupted the back up for some reason.
It took a lot of time to get all the programs running the way it was, both times.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom