Merged Continuation - 9/11 CT subforum General Discussion Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
What I wanted to know, is how accurate is a 767's altimeter at less that 1000 feet altitude? I would think it would have to be pretty accurate to accommodate landings. If you were using the altimeter to target a specific floor of the WTC, how accurate could you be?

I'm sorry, it's kinda gory...just curious.


We've had this discussion before in response to Rob Balsamo's claim that the AA77 FDR indicated a flyover because the plane was "too high". If you hate your brain, do a forum search...but I won't be held accountable for lost brain cells.

The short answer is that the altimeter of an airliner is accurate to about 20 feet at lower altitudes, but there is a large possibility of error when the aircraft is flying outside its normal design envelope and it's also susceptible to pneumatic lag at high rates of descent and high speed. For landing, or more accurately, precision landings, a radar altimeter is used for increased accuracy to about a foot.

The idea that a homing device was placed in the towers is silly. I'd be happy to detail why if anyone is interested...
 
Last edited:
Off topic question that didn't deserve a new thead:

Many in the TM propose that the events of the WTC were a CD. This would mean the planes that struck the towers, were not flown by terrorists, but by either suicidal agents of the NWO, or by remote control.

This would require the pilots to target a specific area of the building where the pre-planted charges had been previously dispatched.

:con2: Wouldn't they have to have hit the building at somewhere where there weren't charges, so as not to destroy the rigging? Especially since the towers were "demolished" about an hour later?

Either way, their scenario requires magic, hushaboom explosives.
 
:con2: Wouldn't they have to have hit the building at somewhere where there weren't charges, so as not to destroy the rigging? Especially since the towers were "demolished" about an hour later?

Either way, their scenario requires magic, hushaboom explosives.

Nah...the assumption now is that the videos have been doctored. In fact it's turning into a dead give away that 9/11 was an inside job.

You see at best we have a couple of dozen cameras that do not provide audio of explosions and yet we have absolutely hundreds of anecdotal reports of explosions from every kind of eyewitness.I hardly know of any eyewitness that does not report explosions from TV crews to first responders to civilians.. If you like I can provide you with literally hundreds upon hundreds of references.
 
Last edited:
On a stundie hunt, I noticed that CIT's forum had all of 2 (yes two) messages posted yesterday. One from a brand new poster the other a one liner from Ranke in reply.


Methinks the CIT juggernought is stopping at obscurity central.



Compus


It's hilarious. It looks like a good 50% of the threads started over there are either by craig or aldo "calling someone out". When nobody responds they declare victory by default and give a healthy "naaner naaner naaner" to the "duh-bunkers". Threads started by CIT, and responded to by CIT. It really is tumbleweed central over there. What a joke!

L.

P.S. I do have to give credit where credit is due though. Aldo's frequent profanity laden rants in response to HIS OWN threads are highly entertaining.
 
Last edited:
It's hilarious. It looks like a good 50% of the threads started over there are either by craig or aldo "calling someone out". When nobody responds they declare victory by default and give a healthy "naaner naaner naaner" to the "duh-bunkers". Threads started by CIT, and responded to by CIT. It really is tumbleweed central over there. What a joke!

L.

Why don't you put a link to their 80-minute video up ? Then the outside readers can decide for themselves whether you are telling the truth about CIT or not . If you don't put up such a link within say 15 minutes- I will. Then the readers can make an informed decision based on the facts.
 
Last edited:
It's hilarious. It looks like a good 50% of the threads started over there are either by craig or aldo "calling someone out". When nobody responds they declare victory by default and give a healthy "naaner naaner naaner" to the "duh-bunkers". Threads started by CIT, and responded to by CIT. It really is tumbleweed central over there. What a joke!

L.


They must be bored...I keep getting emails that they changed my user name. I went from Macgruber to Mitch the Bitch, then back to Macgruber... but still can't post...go figure. :)
 
Why don't you put a link to their 80-minute video up ? Then the outside readers can decide for themselves whether you are telling the truth about CIT or not . Iyou don't put up such a link within say 15 minutes- I will. Theen the readers can make an informed decision based on the facts.

I will not put up a link to CIT for the same reasons I will not link to porn sites, racist hate sites, or any site that deals in filth, lies, and/or garbage. If it's so damn important, so Earth shattering, why don't YOU put up a link troother? Why wait 15 minutes? I'm sure we could all use a good laugh now, rather than later. Why didn't you link to it when it was first released? Why didn't you start a thread about it?

L.

P.S. How exactly does watching an 80 minute video disprove the fact that CIT has almost no traffic whatsoever? (I'm just asking questions)
 
Last edited:
Ask me some questions then .



<sigh>


bill smith said:
The point s that all the TV companies have put their live broadcast footage on their websites. You will agree that this is part of the immutable physical record of events on 9/11 ? Any significant alteration of that record is a moral outrage if not a flat out crime. . The archive site I link to shows hours of contiguous footage from all the major channels both before the events began and after. All appear to be as broadcat on the day. All except FOX who is the only company to have caught the plane going through the building.
However they have replaced that sequence on their site with other footage shot from the opposite side of the Towers. This is no longer the authentic broadcast and is a clear attempt tp hide the penetraton shot. So I wanted your evaluation of why they did it ?



Ok I took the time to have a look at the MyFox New York website. It took me about 30 seconds to google it.

Being the charitable guy I am, I'll help you out. On THIS PAGE I found something you may be interested in.

Wind it forward to near the end Bill (to about 14:50) oh my.


344914ac00403c0704.jpg



It's the Chopper 5 video Bill, right there for all the world to see. Do you see it Bill? Fox haven't "replaced" anything.

Who is "purging" what? Who is hiding the "penetration"? Not Fox.

Do you understand now why I didn't want to "evaluate" what you stated? You are wrong Bill. Plainly simply honestly specific.


Compus
 
<sigh>






Ok I took the time to have a look at the MyFox New York website. It took me about 30 seconds to google it.

Being the charitable guy I am, I'll help you out. On THIS PAGE I found something you may be interested in.

Wind it forward to near the end Bill (to about 14:50) oh my.


[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/344914ac00403c0704.jpg[/qimg]


It's the Chopper 5 video Bill, right there for all the world to see. Do you see it Bill? Fox haven't "replaced" anything.

Who is "purging" what? Who is hiding the "penetration"? Not Fox.

Do you understand now why I didn't want to "evaluate" what you stated? You are wrong Bill. Plainly simply honestly specific.


Compus

Yes I'll have to get back to you on this.
 
I will not put up a link to CIT for the same reasons I will not link to porn sites, racist hate sites, or any site that deals in filth, lies, and/or garbage. If it's so damn important, so Earth shattering, why don't YOU put up a link troother? Why wait 15 minutes? I'm sure we could all use a good laugh now, rather than later. Why didn't you link to it when it first was released? Why didn't you start a thread about it?

L.

P.S. How exactly does watching an 80 minute video disprove the fact that CIT has almost no traffic whatsoever?

Well Readers....it looks like Lupie here would rather that you stay in the dark about what happened at the Pentagon on 9/11. I am delighted to bring you this exhausively researched 81-minute video that proves beyond any shadow of a doubt that the Pentagon event (and by extension all of 9/11) was an inside job. Enjoy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5FhQc-LJ-o
 
Last edited:
Well Readers....it looks like Lupie here would rather that you stay in the dark about what happened at the Pentagon on 9/11. I am delighted to bring you this exhausively researched 81-minute video that proves beyond any shadow of a doubt that the Pentagon event (and by extension all of 9/11) was an inside job. Enjoy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5FhQc-LJ-o

Somehow "exhaustively researched" coming from you sounds pretty hollow. You're the one after exhaustively researching the WTC fires came to the earth-shattering conclusion that there must have been smoke generators in them, remember?
 
Well Readers....it looks like Lupie here would rather that you stay in the dark about what happened at the Pentagon on 9/i1. I am delighted to bring you this exhausively researched 81-minute video that proves beyond any shadow of a doubt that the Pentagon event (and by extension all of 9/11) was an inside job. Enjoy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5FhQc-LJ-o

Bill, I have to hand it to you, you are good for a laugh. You know, if I really had any power, any ability whatsoever to make sure people "stay in the dark", I would magically make your CIT link suddenly disappear. Heck, I'd make the CIT website disappear for that matter. You give me far too much credit Bill, but I do appreciate your generosity.

L.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom