• 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.

Flight 175 plane speed challenged

Slayhamlet said:
The level of thickness you exhibit is absolutely exasperating. What the hell does anything you've said in this entire thread prove?

Show a single cogent point you've made in this entire thread. You've done nothing but hand-wave.
Click to expand...
Show some evidence.
 
twinstead said:
Zen are you suggesting that the DNA evidence is faked? Of course you can't deny it as evidence just because you THINK it could have been faked. In order to discount it you would need evidence it was.

Otherwise it stands as valid evidence you say we are not giving you.
Click to expand...
DNA isn't an open and shut case. Remember OJ?

I didn't say the passengers were make-believe people.
 
ZENSMACK89 said:
You need to prove they did. The only thing the Airlines were concerned with was getting their Gov bailout and making sure the only thing the supposed hijackers had were short knives so that they wouldn't be liable.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101031201-549004,00.html

Air Support
Monday, Nov. 24, 2003 By SALLY B. DONNELLY/PHOENIX

Remember the airline bailouts following 9/11? Less than a month after the 2001 attacks, Congress rushed through a $15 billion bounty of subsidies and loan guarantees for U.S. carriers — which suffered catastrophic human and business losses that day and the next two. Washington first forked over money for anything that could be linked to 9/11, then paid out $1.5 billion in assistance to five airlines that claimed to be on the verge of extinction.

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/context.jsp?item=a021104shortknives#a021104shortknives

February 11, 2004: Hijackers Said to Use Short Knives, Not Box Cutters It is reported the 9/11 Commission now believes that the hijackers used short knives instead of box cutters. The New York Observer comments, “Remember the airlines’ first reports, that the whole job was pulled off with box cutters? In fact, investigators for the commission found that box cutters were reported on only one plane [Flight 77]. In any case, box cutters were considered straight razors and were always illegal. Thus the airlines switched their story and produced a snap-open knife of less than four inches at the hearing. This weapon falls conveniently within the aviation-security guidelines pre-9/11.” [New York Observer, 2/11/2004] It was publicly revealed in late 2002 that box cutters were illegal on 9/11.
Click to expand...
Your claim is that the plane was not identified! I'm call BS on this. Prove it or retract your statement. Show me where United says their plane was not Identified.

Please don't try to change the subject again.
 
ZENSMACK89 said:
Did they DNA match it to family member’s right there at ground zero?
Click to expand...

They had thousands of samples to match. At what point is this something that can be done on site? They cataloged all of the samples and then added the know samples. They did not have a line and say yep this matches your sample. The mere fact that doing it in the open would further contaminate samples is just the beginning of the logistical issues. I know you watch CSI but real life does not work like that.
 
afinemadness said:
They had thousands of samples to match. At what point is this something that can be done on site? They cataloged all of the samples and then added the know samples. They did not have a line and say yep this matches your sample. The mere fact that doing it in the open would further contaminate samples is just the beginning of the logistical issues. I know you watch CSI but real life does not work like that.
Click to expand...

But you see, that makes him able to handwave away the DNA evidence because the gubmint must have taken it away and faked the results.

He will do that for every single bit of evidence presented, and then claim that no evidence was presented.

It's a sure-fire way of never loosing a debate, at least in ones own mind. Simply either deny any evidence that contradicts your position, or claim it is invalid because it could have been faked.

He must have studied at Apollo Hoax Conspiracy University.
 
afinemadness said:
They had thousands of samples to match. At what point is this something that can be done on site? They cataloged all of the samples and then added the know samples. They did not have a line and say yep this matches your sample. The mere fact that doing it in the open would further contaminate samples is just the beginning of the logistical issues. I know you watch CSI but real life does not work like that.
Click to expand...
Yes that was my point. Thank you. Now given that you understand at least some of that point. How is 12 DNA identified people from flight 175 proof that 175 hit the tower?
 
ZENSMACK89 said:
Yes that was my point. Thank you. Now given that you understand at least some of that point. How is 12 DNA identified people from flight 175 proof that 175 hit the tower?
Click to expand...

Where was that DNA collected? Can you provide any evidence of mishandling or deception of the DNA chain of control?
 
ZENSMACK89 said:
Yes that was my point. Thank you. Now given that you understand at least some of that point. How is 12 DNA identified people from flight 175 proof that 175 hit the tower?
Click to expand...

The fact that found even 12 is amazing. To think that with all of the devastation and the fires that any DNA survived is amazing. I know that there are people in the building that they have never found a trace of so 12 on the flight was incredible. I have no issue with that number
 
ZENSMACK89 said:
Did they DNA match it to family member’s right there at ground zero?
Click to expand...


This is an impossible burden of proof. You know that's not how it works, and never has. Are you willing to dispute the sentencing of every criminal that was convicted based on DNA evidence? Do you have any documented cases of DNA testing in the field?
 
DGM said:
Your claim is that the plane was not identified! I'm call BS on this. Prove it or retract your statement. Show me where United says their plane was not Identified.

Please don't try to change the subject again.
Click to expand...
BS right back at you. Show some evidence it was identified. You were the one who brought up the airlines not saying anything about it.
 
ZENSMACK89 said:
http://physics911.net/georgenelson

"In all my years of direct and indirect participation, I never witnessed nor even heard of an aircraft loss, where the wreckage was accessible, that prevented investigators from finding enough hard evidence to positively identify the make, model, and specific registration number of the aircraft — and in most cases the precise cause of the accident. This is because every military and civilian passenger-carrying aircraft have many parts that are identified for safety of flight. That is, if any of the parts were to fail at any time during a flight, the failure would likely result in the catastrophic loss of aircraft and passengers. Consequently, these parts are individually controlled by a distinctive serial number and tracked by a records section of the maintenance operation and by another section called plans and scheduling."
Click to expand...

he is at best a fool and at worst a liar

some of his claims are false and he is a 911 kook

how do you know that they do not have serialized parts and that they have not been identified? and why you should get to see them anyway? what difference would it make? are you an investigator? do you get to see evidence in other crimes?

can you walk in off the street and ask a judge to see the murder weapon in a trial?

stop playing games
 
DGM said:
Nice try! But your dodge is not accepted. Try again slick. Your claim you prove it or retract it.
Click to expand...

No you have it backwards. You claimed they proved it meaning you claimed they did something to prove it.

What did they do to prove it?

I'm not asking how they claimed to have identified some passengers or pointed to something on a video they think was a 767 that hit the towers and assumed it was flight 175.

How was it proven to be flight 175? How has it been proven a 767 can go the speeds claimed at that altitude and perform the maneuvers claimed never mind all this done by an amateur pilot?

Did you read the op and follow the links?

BTW I’ll need some evidence to retract. Got any?

Slick?
 
funk de fino said:
he is at best a fool and at worst a liar

some of his claims are false and he is a 911 kook
Click to expand...

Dispute what he says not him.

funk de fino said:
how do you know that they do not have serialized parts and that they have not been identified? and why you should get to see them anyway?
Click to expand...

Because they haven't presented any. Why shouldn't I? Is it a secret?

funk de fino said:
what difference would it make? are you an investigator? do you get to see evidence in other crimes?
Click to expand...

If it's made public yes.

funk de fino said:
can you walk in off the street and ask a judge to see the murder weapon in a trial?
Click to expand...

When was the 9/11 trial that proved flight 175 hit the tower?

funk de fino said:
stop playing games
Click to expand...

Who was the 9/11 commission report for? Why did they make it public?
 
ZENSMACK89 said:
http://physics911.net/georgenelson

"In all my years of direct and indirect participation, I never witnessed nor even heard of an aircraft loss, where the wreckage was accessible, that prevented investigators from finding enough hard evidence to positively identify the make, model, and specific registration number of the aircraft — and in most cases the precise cause of the accident. This is because every military and civilian passenger-carrying aircraft have many parts that are identified for safety of flight. That is, if any of the parts were to fail at any time during a flight, the failure would likely result in the catastrophic loss of aircraft and passengers. Consequently, these parts are individually controlled by a distinctive serial number and tracked by a records section of the maintenance operation and by another section called plans and scheduling."
Click to expand...


And your point is?

If it's the old "no serialized parts were identified" canard - how do you know that NTSB/FBI invesitigators did no such IDing? Because there are no youtube videos? No pictures?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom