Debunking Popular Mechanics

[gumboot]

Another outright lie concerns the thoroughness of our air defense system. PM claims that only one airplane (Payne Stewart's ill-fated private jet) was intercepted in the decade prior to 9/11. Not true. Sixty-seven of them occurred in just the one year before 9/11 alone. The 'one intercept' lie serves to back another one of PM's lies: that the Airforce was previously only trained to handle foreign attacks, coming from beyond our borders, and that the U.S. continental mainland was a defenseless donut-hole. Blatant falsehood.

I just thought I'd jump on this particular one because it's something I'm familiar with.

Kameelyun, to begin with, you are confusing the nature of the intercepts. NORAD's duty is to intercept aircraft inside the Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) which is a narrow band across the water at the coastline of north america. Intercepts inside the ADIZ are indeed routine and happen frequently.

However, none of the aircraft hijacked on 9/11 at any stage entered, nor were scheduled to enter the ADIZ. Thus in comparing NORAD's intercept performance, you must compare them to a time when NORAD intercepted a flight OUTSIDE the ADIZ. Obviously NORAD won't intercept aircraft over international waters (because they have no legal right to) so in this instance we're talking about the airspace directly over the US itself.

In the 10 years prior to 9/11 the intercept of Payne Stewart's learjet was INDEED the ONLY intercept performed by NORAD over the continental United States (and outside the ADIZ).

In regard to your second claim of falsehood, the above points demonstrate your lack of knowledge in this regard. There is no regular standing proceedure for military protection of US airspace outside the ADIZ, and there never has. In the event of a full scale attack/war a special military situation occurs which essentially hands all US airspace over to military control, making all of North America a temporary ADIZ (temporary ADIZs are also implemented in other situations such as surrounding Air Force One).

You demonstrate a significant lack of knowledge and understanding in this particular subject area.

-Gumboot

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

<snip> (PLEASE Lisa and Darat...let me go Penn & Teller on this guy) <snip>

Oh, heck no. If Darat, Lisa, and JMercer don't let me go P&T on Lyte Trip, you don't get to go P&T on the newbie.

 

[Panoply_Prefect]

Here I go to bed safely sure that tomorrow will bring a couple of new posts by the threadmaker followed by at least ten more pages, only to come here with a fresh cup of morning coffee, realising Elvis has truly left the building.

DISSSAPPPOOOINTEEED!

 

[kameelyun]

No, I didn't run away...

I just had a normal away-from-the-monitor life after 6 p.m. yesterday.

I have no idea what James Randi's views are on 9/11, but one thing is pretty clear. This forum is for true believers of the official conspiracy theory.

I will admit I was wrong about one thing... most of the initial first few responses to my thread were not "flames" as such. However, even those posts were of a "Provide evidence, and I bet you can't, haha."

However, dare I leave my computer for a few hours, and the flames do start to pour on. "May I pull a Penn and Teller on this guy?" Smearers of 9/11 Truth love to call us "twoofers," a name intended to spread derision and even waves of hate.

As a "twoofer," my mission is to educate as many people as I can about the existense of the collapse of WTC 7. Outside this forum, most people who know about WTC 7 are of the "inside job" belief, but most people I talk to in real life still haven't heard of WTC 7. I don't see my "mission" as one of converting OCT true believers. I clearly am not going to change the minds of anyone on this board who disregard Steve Jones' work, who is a physicist... Oh, I'm sorry, his specialty is cold fusion, which makes him totally unqualified to talk about the collapse of buildings.

The first Popular Mechanics article was before Steven Jones burst on the scene. Was Popular Mechanics interested in studying Steven Jones' findings? No, as soon as Jones gains traction, PM simply expands their article into a book, summarily dismisses Jones' work as misguided and inaccurate.

I knew within a few posts I would get the "what are your engineering qualifications?" My answer is: none, other than that I am a concerned citizen. Also, having no engineering qualifications actually makes the MIHOP case stronger: If the demolition is so obvious that even a non-scientist can call on it with certainty... you get my point.

I'm not an expert on fire or smoke either. Maybe the black stuff emanating from the WTC wasn't really smoke. It just "looked" like smoke. You know the "air pressure" coming from WTC 7 as it collapses? MAN, they look like blast points!

Looks like us "twoofers" have our opinion and the JREF members have theirs. This probably will be my last post in this thread. Cheers!

 

[Pardalis]

The first Popular Mechanics article was before Steven Jones burst on the scene.

That's a funny way to say it.

 

[Buckaroo]

This probably will be my last post in this thread. Cheers!

Can't take the heat, eh?.

 

[Pardalis]

Here's some literature that might help you, kameleon.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/local_links.php?catid=18

 

[Gravy]

I will admit I was wrong about one thing... most of the initial first few responses to my thread were not "flames" as such. However, even those posts were of a "Provide evidence, and I bet you can't, haha."

Shocking, isn't it? It's almost as if you stumbled on a site populated by critical thinkers! Good luck with your delusions. We'll always be here if you're interested in discussing evidence.

 

[Minadin]

having no engineering qualifications actually makes the MIHOP case stronger

Yeah, I would imagine that it would. Not being burdened by facts, education, or experience, might make me more free to believe that structures behave in the way that some truthers seem to think they do. Of course, I would be mistaken, I just wouldn't know it.

 

[mortimer]

I have no idea what James Randi's views are on 9/11, but one thing is pretty clear. This forum is for true believers of the official conspiracy theory.

We are true believers in evidence, wherever that evidence may lead. You, on the other hand, have reached a conclusion first, and then have searched for evidence that supports that conclusion. Unfortunately for you, it seems you've found none.

 

[stateofgrace]

I just had a normal away-from-the-monitor life after 6 p.m. yesterday.

I have no idea what James Randi's views are on 9/11, but one thing is pretty clear. This forum is for true believers of the official conspiracy theory.

I will admit I was wrong about one thing... most of the initial first few responses to my thread were not "flames" as such. However, even those posts were of a "Provide evidence, and I bet you can't, haha."

However, dare I leave my computer for a few hours, and the flames do start to pour on. "May I pull a Penn and Teller on this guy?" Smearers of 9/11 Truth love to call us "twoofers," a name intended to spread derision and even waves of hate.

As a "twoofer," my mission is to educate as many people as I can about the existense of the collapse of WTC 7. Outside this forum, most people who know about WTC 7 are of the "inside job" belief, but most people I talk to in real life still haven't heard of WTC 7. I don't see my "mission" as one of converting OCT true believers. I clearly am not going to change the minds of anyone on this board who disregard Steve Jones' work, who is a physicist... Oh, I'm sorry, his specialty is cold fusion, which makes him totally unqualified to talk about the collapse of buildings.

The first Popular Mechanics article was before Steven Jones burst on the scene. Was Popular Mechanics interested in studying Steven Jones' findings? No, as soon as Jones gains traction, PM simply expands their article into a book, summarily dismisses Jones' work as misguided and inaccurate.

I knew within a few posts I would get the "what are your engineering qualifications?" My answer is: none, other than that I am a concerned citizen. Also, having no engineering qualifications actually makes the MIHOP case stronger: If the demolition is so obvious that even a non-scientist can call on it with certainty... you get my point.

I'm not an expert on fire or smoke either. Maybe the black stuff emanating from the WTC wasn't really smoke. It just "looked" like smoke. You know the "air pressure" coming from WTC 7 as it collapses? MAN, they look like blast points!

Looks like us "twoofers" have our opinion and the JREF members have theirs. This probably will be my last post in this thread. Cheers!

Good luck with your mission. Personally I tent to listen to people who are qualified and who are experts in their fields.

You being a non expert are in no position to validate Jones paper which as been debunked to death, nor are you in a position to make ludicrous claims that you cannot back up. But don't let that stop you spreading your lies; don't let that stop you converting the gullible and naive to your way of thinking.

Pathetic.

 

[Overman]

At least he/she ran away quick, and this thread might stay under 200 posts!

Yeah for server space!

 

[CurtC]

Welcome back, kameelyun. If the people on this board are "true believers," that's only because we've already evaluated all the evidence that we can find, and have reached an inescapable conclusion. If you have new evidence, everyone here stands willing to change his mind. But so far, you have presented zero evidence, just a bunch of asssertions.

I have no idea what James Randi's views are on 9/11, but one thing is pretty clear. This forum is for true believers of the official conspiracy theory.

Randi has said very little about 9/11, but even if he came out today and said he fully believes the Troother theories, the people here would still demand evidence. That's the deal about skeptics - our major characteristic is not that we disbelieve the "common wisdom," but that we demand evidence for every claim, and will go whichever way the evidence leads. At least, that's the ideal we strive for.

I knew within a few posts I would get the "what are your engineering qualifications?" My answer is: none, other than that I am a concerned citizen. Also, having no engineering qualifications actually makes the MIHOP case stronger: If the demolition is so obvious that even a non-scientist can call on it with certainty... you get my point.

So your point is that a handful of non-experts can see the obviousness of the MIHOP scenario, but every real expert in the whole world can't see it? You do see what's wrong with this, right?

If you want to run away, that's fine. But if you want to test your ideas with people who really know how to evaluate evidence, hang around.

 

[beachnut]

As a "twoofer," my mission is to educate as many people as I can about the existense of the collapse of WTC 7. Outside this forum, most people who know about WTC 7 are of the "inside job" belief, but most people I talk to in real life still haven't heard of WTC 7. I don't see my "mission" as one of converting OCT true believers. I clearly am not going to change the minds of anyone on this board who disregard Steve Jones' work, who is a physicist... Oh, I'm sorry, his specialty is cold fusion, which makes him totally unqualified to talk about the collapse of buildings.

The first Popular Mechanics article was before Steven Jones burst on the scene. Was Popular Mechanics interested in studying Steven Jones' findings? No, as soon as Jones gains traction, PM simply expands their article into a book, summarily dismisses Jones' work as misguided and inaccurate.

I knew within a few posts I would get the "what are your engineering qualifications?" My answer is: none, other than that I am a concerned citizen. Also, having no engineering qualifications actually makes the MIHOP case stronger: If the demolition is so obvious that even a non-scientist can call on it with certainty... you get my point.

I'm not an expert on fire or smoke either. Maybe the black stuff emanating from the WTC wasn't really smoke. It just "looked" like smoke. You know the "air pressure" coming from WTC 7 as it collapses? MAN, they look like blast points!

Looks like us "twoofers" have our opinion and the JREF members have theirs. This probably will be my last post in this thread. Cheers!

Poor kid; buildings burn and fall down. It happens all around the world you are just blind to it. Go ask some firemen and engineers. Remember the so called truth movement that has no facts or evidence also only has 0.00067 percent of all US engineers on board. Meaning you CTers are wrong. Go ask some engineers since you are making up lies why not know you are doing so.

Steven Jones? Dr Thermite Jones; have you even read his first paper? He has no facts. His paper changes each time he learns he can not bring down a building with thermite. He added RDX after he talked to CD experts. Ask him how it happen and he gives you the standard "I do not know" we need a new investigation". I thought he was able to do investigation. Is he qualified to study 9/11? NO. He hates bush and the war in Iraq which is due to violations of a ceasefire. He can not even think straight after all those years. Where was Dr Jones in 2001 when thousands of engineers and scientist were studying the WTC steel and collapse outside the "official story"? These engineers etal were making improvements in steel, fire protection, and structures to help us in the future. Where was Dr Jones? You have failed to research 9/11 to know there are more studies to buy than there are in the truth movement.

You do not have to be an engineer to be smart enough to know what happen on 9/11. No the air is not a blast from an explosion. A blast would have ripped out many windows. Why? Since in normal CD you see some blast effects coming from the carefully covered explosives so they do not send objects thousands of feet. Did I say thousands? YES In the WTC there were no explosives planted, if there were they would have blasted out many windows. You see if explosive were planted they could not have place the covering on them, it would stop the elevators from working and you would have mattress sized objects in people offices. So the air is air pressure you can tell how it acts. You have failed to study that.

You should go back to school. Some people with only a fifth grade math and science skills are not as dumb to become a CTer who stops thinking and joins the dumbest nut cases I have seen in my whole life. If you fall for the lies of 9/11 truth there is no hope for you when the insurance man comes let alone the vacuum salesman.

Next time bring just facts. Bet you can not find one! You messed up your NORAD lies and you have no facts on anything. Good luck finishing High School you will need it.

It may be safe now to say you have left?

 

[Pardalis]

Also, having no engineering qualifications actually makes the MIHOP case stronger: If the demolition is so obvious that even a non-scientist can call on it with certainty... you get my point.

See this animal?

Could you tell me just by looking at this animal if it is more closely related to this animal,

or this one?

 

[~enigma~]

This forum is for true believers of the official conspiracy theory.

This forum is for everybody but if they ignore science they will get called on it. If you don't like getting called on science you can always try to apply some or your free to post elswhere where people accept your bs.

and the flames do start to pour on. "May I pull a Penn and Teller on this guy?"

A flame would have been if I went P&T on you without asking. Besides, you deserve it for your inhuman attempt to instill fear with your use of a term you can't even define.

In the words of Anne Robinson "You are the weakest link...Goodbye."

 

[babazaroni]

Kameelyun, since you do not have any response to our take on the '67 intercept' myth, we will assume your view on this has been changed.

Try not to actually put such a specific claim in your reviews in the future, as this just opens you up for embarrassment. Stick to broad generalities, common sense and feelings.

 

[uk_dave]

I knew within a few posts I would get the "what are your engineering qualifications?" My answer is: none, other than that I am a concerned citizen. Also, having no engineering qualifications actually makes the MIHOP case stronger: If the demolition is so obvious that even a non-scientist can call on it with certainty... you get my point.

I'm not an expert on fire or smoke either. Maybe the black stuff emanating from the WTC wasn't really smoke. It just "looked" like smoke. You know the "air pressure" coming from WTC 7 as it collapses? MAN, they look like blast points!

Looks like us "twoofers" have our opinion and the JREF members have theirs. This probably will be my last post in this thread. Cheers!

That's actually very very funny.

So a non-scientist can call it but scientists and experts don't.
And that really doesn't ring any alarm bells for you?
Could it possibly be that your assumptions are wrong and that a little technical knowledge might be beneficial to your perception of events?

Just put that thought in the background there...... you know, that maybe...just maybe, you're not always right about things you have no training or technical expertise about.

Just consider the possibility.....

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Ah yes, the good old standby of addressing the less substantive posts, ignore the more substantive posts, and go off in a huff.

 

[Horatius]

I will admit I was wrong about one thing... most of the initial first few responses to my thread were not "flames" as such. However, even those posts were of a "Provide evidence, and I bet you can't, haha."

Nice to see you can admit a mistake. Too bad you then turn around and commit another two right away. Your "flames" comment was post 13, and none of the posts prior to that could be considered to be "flames", nor did any of them make any sort of "haha" type comments. There was one that could be read as slightly snarky, but as he seems to have dealt with you before, you can't really use that prior history to judge the rest of us.

Either you're deliberately lying to try and make us look bad (and failing miserably at it), or you're reading our posts with your head full of preconceived notions, and this colours the tone you read them with. Please do try and avoid both these behaviours.

I clearly am not going to change the minds of anyone on this board who disregard Steve Jones' work, who is a physicist... Oh, I'm sorry, his specialty is cold fusion, which makes him totally unqualified to talk about the collapse of buildings.

So nice to see you acknowledge that Jones' isn't qualtified to address the collapses of the buildings. Too bad you were trying to be sarcastic in doing so.

You twoofers (derision! hate! ) really need to learn that it takes a lot of relevant education to be able to comment intelligently on such complicated topics.

I knew within a few posts I would get the "what are your engineering qualifications?" My answer is: none, other than that I am a concerned citizen. Also, having no engineering qualifications actually makes the MIHOP case stronger: If the demolition is so obvious that even a non-scientist can call on it with certainty... you get my point.

I'm not an expert on fire or smoke either. Maybe the black stuff emanating from the WTC wasn't really smoke. It just "looked" like smoke. You know the "air pressure" coming from WTC 7 as it collapses? MAN, they look like blast points!

See? You have no expertise, or even any experience at all of any of the topics you need to understand these issues. You also have none of the skills that you would need to determine which "experts" you should listen to. So you end up getting everything wrong. Yet your twoofer arrogance makes you incapable of seeing or acknowledging this.

Looks like us "twoofers" have our opinion and the JREF members have theirs. This probably will be my last post in this thread. Cheers!

And now you try the old "everyone's opinions are equally valid" schtick. Nope, not going to fly here. People like R.Mackey, Architect and others (like all the guys at PM) really do know more than you about these issues. Their expert opinions, and our opinions based on their expert analyses, really are better than the twoofer crap.