Ed Pentagon - TruthMakesPeace

[dafydd]

You posted a lie. Retract it. How can they make blackbox data from the WTC planes public if it doesnt exist?

You're not even hiding it now.

A truther posting a lie? Surely not,I am shocked to the core. What is the world coming to?

 

[triforcharity]

I have no idea if the FDR is design to withstand any of this... I have never made a claim.

Ba...ba...ba....************!

Remember this post?

I think the FDR's are designed to withstand levels well beyond what occurred at the WTC.

In everybody's haste to waylay a "Toofer" (which I am not)

I can safely call ************ on this one too.

some assumptions were made but nobody called anybody out it due to some freaky degree of bonding between Posters.

No, not assumptions, facts and knowledge. FDR's and CVR's are not designed to withstand the impacts and fires that they were exposed to.

If what you say about the FDR getting to the bottom of the building prior to collapse... then I can agree with the inability for the FDR to withstand the collapse but to sift through all of this due to some personalized red herring comments that had no foundation is downright foolish.

No, you're assumptions and spouting off at the mouth is foolish.

I really thought a decorum would be followed instead of Irish Debate Rules.

I'm Irish. Got a problem with our debate rules?

anyway, thanks for your insight.

So, when will you be admitting that A-You're a truther and B- that you were dead wrong. It's simple really.

 

[beachnut]

I think the FDR's are designed to withstand levels well beyond what occurred at the WTC. I am not sure how many years ago this happened but in Brazil a Boeing aircraft collided with another plane at 37K feet and the recorder was recovered.

You need to look up things before making false statements. Two plane colliding might be about the kinetic equal to 3000 pound bomb, the collapse of the WTC include the kinetic energy of over 130 TONS (not pounds, but tons) of TNT. What occurred at the WTC involved energies 50 to 100 times greater than aircraft impacting aircraft, or the ground. Physics.

This line of posts was a result of your post, your opinion, you not looking it up first.

 

[ladmo]

Remember seeing the 3 to 5 floors of the WTC fused together by the collapse? The FDR could be crushed in those floors. What is your goal, your need? The photo was a photo of the CVR at the Pentagon, it is labeled as such by name, and it did not do well, and the FDR in the Pentagon may of perished if the fire was not FOUGHT, they fought the fire at the Pentagon, and the building still collapsed.

How many floors of the WTC falling could a FDR survive? What is the question, and who ... ?

I do not see the label CVR. You could very well be 110% correct but that is not what was posted... he clearly stated FDR. I was asking for clarification on a point, I never made a point, I only said an FDR survived an 8 mile fall... that was all and then the defensive neck hairs went up on Trutherslie.

I know nothing about FDR's and it appears that there are others that know less than me but are very good with ad hominems.

 

[triforcharity]

Lets see. Find out the amount of heat energy of a fire of 2012 deg. F would produce in one minute, then miltiply that by 60.

Then, find out the same for 1400 deg. F, and figure out the difference.
Here, I'll give you a hint.

Q = m(c)Δt

 

[ladmo]

Ba...ba...ba....************!

Remember this post?






I can safely call ************ on this one too.




No, not assumptions, facts and knowledge. FDR's and CVR's are not designed to withstand the impacts and fires that they were exposed to.




No, you're assumptions and spouting off at the mouth is foolish.



I'm Irish. Got a problem with our debate rules?



So, when will you be admitting that A-You're a truther and B- that you were dead wrong. It's simple really.

1. not a Truther 2. I did make an assumption (was not aware of it) and that is incorrect on my part. 3. sorry about your ancestry, I too am of Irish descent 4. "spouting"... I will chalk that up to Irish.

Frankly, there were just a few things I wanted cleared up, I am not Truther, Toofer or whatever else they are called... if that is what a person who is questioning others, then I guess we are all Spartacus.

 

[ladmo]

Lets see. Find out the amount of heat energy of a fire of 2012 deg. F would produce in one minute, then miltiply that by 60.

Then, find out the same for 1400 deg. F, and figure out the difference.
Here, I'll give you a hint.

Q = m(c)Δt

Then I am incorrect. I thought material composition was a component in the algorithm when determining exposure levels.

 

[beachnut]

I do not see the label CVR. You could very well be 110% correct but that is not what was posted... he clearly stated FDR. I was asking for clarification on a point, I never made a point, I only said an FDR survived an 8 mile fall... that was all and then the defensive neck hairs went up on Trutherslie.

I know nothing about FDR's and it appears that there are others that know less than me but are very good with ad hominems.

After nearly 10 years, the photo of the crushed CVR is common knowledege, and labeled as such in the name of the file. Like the name, *.jpg.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fa/Flight_77_CVR.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Flight_77_CVR.jpg

See the CVR in the name? I did.

Then you post, hey dude, that is the CVR. And you could look up Flt 77 FDR, and post that photo, it is damaged too. Good luck.


If you know nothing then why did you make up false claims?

Penetration: ED-55: 500 lbs/10 ft/¼-inch probe
Static Crush: ED-55: 5000 lbs
Fire
Protection: 50,000 BTU/sq ft/hr for 60 min
at 1100°C; 10 hrs at 260°C
Impact: ED-55: 3400 g, 6.5 ms, half-sine shock wave

Looks like baking in the WTC debris pile for days is past the requirements of a FDR.
Looks like parts of a steel building falling on a FDR could be past the requirements. Static Crush: ED-55: 5000 lbs, do I need to explain 11 or 12 floors would be over 12,000,000 pounds? Can you check that number? Is that more than 5000 pounds?

 

[ladmo]

After nearly 10 years, the photo of the crushed CVR is common knowledege, and labeled as such in the name of the file. Like the name, *.jpg.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fa/Flight_77_CVR.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Flight_77_CVR.jpg

See the CVR in the name? I did.

Then you post, hey dude, that is the CVR. And you could look up Flt 77 FDR, and post that photo, it is damaged too. Good luck.


If you know nothing then why did you make up false claims?

Penetration: ED-55: 500 lbs/10 ft/¼-inch probe
Static Crush: ED-55: 5000 lbs
Fire
Protection: 50,000 BTU/sq ft/hr for 60 min
at 1100°C; 10 hrs at 260°C
Impact: ED-55: 3400 g, 6.5 ms, half-sine shock wave

Looks like baking in the WTC debris pile for days is past the requirements of a FDR.
Looks like parts of a steel building falling on a FDR could be past the requirements. Static Crush: ED-55: 5000 lbs, do I need to explain 11 or 12 floors would be over 12,000,000 pounds? Can you check that number? Is that more than 5000 pounds?

WTF are you talking about I did not post the picture. Aim your remarks to Sabretooth.

I never posted "hey dude, that is the CVR".

What false claims? "I think the FDR's are designed to withstand levels well beyond what occurred at the WTC."? If you think that is a claim, then be it. Then you better go after everyone that states an opinion... and I made it perfectly clear it was an opinion by saying "I think"... not "I know".

 

[beachnut]

WTF are you talking about I did not post the picture. Aim your remarks to Sabretooth.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Flight_77_CVR.jpg

I know you did not post the photo, you failed to check the name of the photo, and the source of the photo which takes less than a second to find.

The you could say, you could have said, "hey dude, that is the CVR". But I guess you can't, since you did not.

That is really strange because the FDR from the Pentagon was recovered and the data retrieved supported the official report. This picture shows a device that is completely destroyed. Are you correct or was the FDR destroyed at the Pentagon? Please clarify.

As you can see, the photo he posted clearly states it is the CVR, I was trying to say it would be more helpful, to point out it was the CVR, and not make more error by not recognizing what is clearly not the CVR. The FDR did show physcal damage, smoke damage, and as you know the data was retrived.

I was saying you could have corrected the photo error, if you had wanted to. No big deal. As you see, the photo was clearly named, CVR, like, exactly like, Flight_77_CVR.jpg

I never posted "hey dude, that is the CVR".

I know that, it is what you could have said if you researched the post you posted to.

What false claims? "I think the FDR's are designed to withstand levels well beyond what occurred at the WTC."? If you think that is a claim, then be it. Then you better go after everyone that states an opinion... and I made it perfectly clear it was an opinion by saying "I think"... not "I know".

yes this is a claim ... a false claim.

I think the FDR's are designed to withstand levels well beyond what occurred at the WTC. I am not sure how many years ago this happened but in Brazil a Boeing aircraft collided with another plane at 37K feet and the recorder was recovered.

What is thinking, but what you think, and thus stating you think the FDR is ... and then failing to tell everyone it is a made up opinion based on a collision with much less energy than the WTC potential, E=mgh.

I think 2+2 is 4. "I think". Just giving you some facts, nothing wrong with being wrong, save you are wrong. Double, maybe triple dose of irony if you think about it. What does cicorp say?

 

[ladmo]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Flight_77_CVR.jpg

I know you did not post the photo, you failed to check the name of the photo, and the source of the photo which takes less than a second to find.

The you could say, you could have said, "hey dude, that is the CVR". But I guess you can't, since you did not.



As you can see, the photo he posted clearly states it is the CVR, I was trying to say it would be more helpful, to point out it was the CVR, and not make more error by not recognizing what is clearly not the CVR. The FDR did show physcal damage, smoke damage, and as you know the data was retrived.

I was saying you could have corrected the photo error, if you had wanted to. No big deal. As you see, the photo was clearly named, CVR, like, exactly like, Flight_77_CVR.jpg

I know that, it is what you could have said if you researched the post you posted to.



yes this is a claim ... a false claim.

What is thinking, but what you think, and thus stating you think the FDR is ... and then failing to tell everyone it is a made up opinion based on a collision with much less energy than the WTC potential, E=mgh.

I think 2+2 is 4. "I think". Just giving you some facts, nothing wrong with being wrong, save you are wrong. Double, maybe triple dose of irony if you think about it. What does cicorp say?

I now comprehend your initial remarks. Not to beat a dead horse and this ground round... You know that 2+2 is 4.

thanks again for the clarification.

 

[beachnut]

I now comprehend your initial remarks. Not to beat a dead horse and this ground round... You know that 2+2 is 4.

thanks again for the clarification.

If you find me one day, a few rounds are on me, for being, me.

We need to distinguish:
1. What was known at the time on the morning of 9/11/2001, and immediately available to the busy Airt Traffic Controllers, versus

Yes 77 was lost to controllers on 911. They had no clue where it was. So? It means nothing for 911 truth except they make up lies and delusions about it.

2. What was known months later, by piecing together various additional radar signals, in preparation for the 9/11 Commission Report.

Sorry, the first thing we do in an investigation is pull the RADAR tapes. We get the data. Not months later, that day! We ask and then we have to analyze the data, starting that day. This is what we do for accidents, and this is what the FBI would ask the NTSB to start doing on 911, the very day. I have investigated aircraft accident, we ask immediately for the RADAR data.

You can verify this on www.911Myths.com - an anti-Truther site, on their page about "Losing Flight 77" in the section "Tracked or not tracked"
http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Losing_Flight_77

The Commission were not saying that all the FAA radar systems were unable to fully track Flight 77, just the preferred and supplemental radars. Flight 77 could still have been tracked on the “tertiary” and “quadrary” radars, and so accessible for later analysis by the Commission, but these wouldn't have been visible to air traffic controllers at the time.
​

So? Means nothing and does not support the lies of 911 truth.

Hindsight is 20 /20. 911Myths confirms that even after Flight 77 came back on radar, the flight controllers were searching its path to the west before it turned. Today, everyone knows where Flight 77 was headed and its intentions. On 9/11/2001 they did not. So the flight path can be calculated and interpolated to cover any blank radar areas.

So? It means it was Flt 77. Thus debunking insane claims of 911 truth. The RADAR data matches the FDR from 77. Verification.

You unfairly imply that the Air Traffic Controllers had all the data for that graph available to them on September 11, 2001. For the Controllers, while trying to track hundreds of other flights, Flight 77 was lost on radar for a significant time.

Nope, 911 truth implies 77 disappeared from RADAR, 77 never disappeared from RADAR and was tracked by RADAR the entire time, more then one RADAR, overlapping RADAR. This RADAR data makes the many moronic claims of 911 truth delusional.

You debunked many 911 truth claims, again.

 

[Sabretooth]

But that is not what Sabretooth posted... he wrote: "This is a photo of what remained of the FDR found at the Pentagon..."

According to the wiki page I pulled it from, it is the shell of the FDR.

And the point went right over your head. So I guess I'll spell it out for you.

I posted the picture to show you the damage. Because this unit, while some data was recovered, is seriously damaged. And yet, it did not have to go through as much holy hell as the ones at the WTC. So, using the visual of this FDR (or CVR) as a point of reference, it's rather obvious as to why it was simply impossible to assume that the boxes could be recovered from the WTC.

I am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt that you aren't being a troll, but you really need to take a moment to comprehend what is being posted toward your comments and questions.

 

[TruthersLie]

I do not see the label CVR. You could very well be 110% correct but that is not what was posted... he clearly stated FDR. I was asking for clarification on a point, I never made a point, I only said an FDR survived an 8 mile fall... that was all and then the defensive neck hairs went up on Trutherslie.

I know nothing about FDR's and it appears that there are others that know less than me but are very good with ad hominems.

It is obvious that you don't know anything about FDR's and instead of ASKING a question, you make the statement that the FDR's should have survived by pointing out that one fell from 8 miles up. woo hoo... They can survive that.

When you made that statement, I pointed out that if it was ONLY the fall, or ONLY the impact then the fact that they didn't survive would be suspicious. I pointed out that it wasn't ONE part, but the COMBINATION of those events including a intense office fire of over 1000C for over an hour, falling 1000 feet, having hundreds of thousands of tons (would tens of thousands have been better for you?) of debris collapse on them, while burning in a debris pile for 99 days would destroy them.

You got bent out of shape on my characterization of the collapse and the trivia of "exactly how much debris fell on them" instead of listening to the idea that it was a combination of the events. Act like a Twoof JAQ'ing off, and I'll call you one. (are you done JAQ'ing off?)

It is a simple statement. It is very direct statement.

 

[TruthMakesPeace]

Name change: Cicorp is now TruthMakesPeace

TruthMakesPeace sounds less "corporate" and is a better name for this forum for truth.

 

[DGM]

TruthMakesPeace sounds less "corporate" and is a better name for this forum for truth.

At least you're focusing on what's important.

 

[TruthersLie]

TruthMakesPeace sounds less "corporate" and is a better name for this forum for truth.

Wonderful

Have you decided to retract your slander of the SEC? The FBI? Have you done your due diligence yet?

didn't think so.

 

[TruthMakesPeace]

New Pentagon theory proposes hijackers were duped and gassed

Wonderful. Have you decided to retract your slander of the SEC?

No slander, or untrue criticism. The SEC has been widely criticized, not just by me, for letting to many Wall Streeters get away with stuff. Also, one bad apple at the top does not spoil the whole bushel. (Put options are another thread).

The FBI?

The FBI is generally honest, even when pressured to charge Bin Laden, they don't add "9/11" to his wanted poster, until they have enough evidence. But again, all it takes is one bad apple at the top, giving orders, such as not to investigate the suspicious terrorists long before 9/11. Agents Coleen Crowley and Robert Wright have spoken out on this. http://patriotsquestion911.com

Here is something new on THIS thread topic: the Pentagon on 9/11. A New Theory proposes that the hijackers, along with the passengers and crew, were gassed on board the planes, which were equipped with Auto Pilot. So the hijackers intended to hijack, but not to die in a crash. That's how they got 19 guys to volunteer. But they were duped by the planners, and died along with everyone. Under this theory, the cell phone calls, plane crashes, witness statements, airplane debris, and DNA evidence were just as stated. See www.911Pentagon.org

 

[TruthersLie]

No slander, or untrue criticism. The SEC has been widely criticized, not by me, for letting to many Wall Streeters get away with stuff. Also, one bad apple at the top does not spoil the whole bushel. (Put options are another thread).

Sorry they are germane to any discussion you start. You have openly slandered the SEC investigators and others. Instead of doing due diligence and actually doing RESEARCH, you have slandered individuals.

You have not answered the accusation of your slander anywhere (not here, nor in the Put option thread). You have taken the word of a KNOWN liar (kevin ryan) and tried to spin it. So until you answer for your slander, it will continue to be asked in any thread you show up in as it demonstrates your character and lack of research abilities.

One bad apple at the top would be caught out in a very public way if as your are suggesting they let someone go...

You suggested that (i'm paraphrasing here) that it is a good business tactic to murder people to drive up stock. Which is NOT what the SEC said. Did you even bother to attempt to contact the lead investigators? I seriously doubt you did. Did you bother to try an FOIA for the records? I seriously doubt it.

The FBI is generally honest, even when pressured to charge Bin Laden, they don't add "9/11" to his wanted poster, until they have enough evidence. But again, all it takes is one bad apple at the top, giving orders, such as not to investigate the suspicious terrorists long before 9/11. Agents Coleen Crowley and Robert Wright have spoken out on this. http://patriotsquestion911.com

Ah yes... and all the field agents under that "one bad apple" remain silent because they are too stupid, too scared or too gutless to stand up for their coutnrymen and women who were murdered. Yup. They must be JUST LIKE YOU.

Here is something new on THIS thread topic: the Pentagon on 9/11. A New Theory proposes that the hijackers, along with the passengers and crew, were gassed on board the planes, which were equipped with Auto Pilot.

ROFLMAO!!!

Now you will slander the ATC, the NTSB and the dead... Way to go.

So the hijackers intended to hijack, but not to die in a crash. That's how they got 19 guys to volunteer. But they were duped by the planners, and died along with everyone.

argument from ignorance and incredulity noted.
YOu do know that there are lots of folks who volunteer to strike at the "great satan" in the arab world. You know that right?

Under this theory, the cell phone calls, plane crashes, witness statements, airplane debris, and DNA evidence were just as stated. See www.911Pentagon.org

Wouldn't it have been easier just to let them crash the jets?

Damn... I love this... NO I really do. so it was planned by rainman and completed by the A team... no sorry.. by the Mission Impossible team.

What happened to your slander of the pentagon work crews and their installation of a giant "cannon" to shoot debris all over the lawn? Do you retract that slander?

 

[TruthMakesPeace]

Sorry they are germane to any discussion you start. You have openly slandered the SEC investigators and others.

Your conclusions do not follow from the premises.
You often make great, erroneous leaps of "logic".
You take one bad apple's performance, and try to imply that applies to a whole agency of 1000's of good and honest people.
That doesn't cut it on a truly Critical Thinking forum.

Kevin Ryan is reliable. Your opinion of him is baseless, providing not a single example when you would need multiple.

You suggested that (i'm paraphrasing here)....

You make a classic setup statement for a Straw Man Argument - some argument you make up and try to apply to me. Argue with yourself in a mirror then.

Ah yes... and all the field agents under that "one bad apple" remain silent

The brave ones did not remain silent, and are speaking out.

Now you will slander the ATC, the NTSB and the dead

Again, you make an illogical leap of applying a characteristic to whole agencies and groups of people. Invalid.

YOu do know that there are lots of folks who volunteer to strike at the "great satan" in the arab world.

But most are not willing to die for it, and not get the chance to see the result. It would be a lot easier to find 19 hijackers for a "standard" hijacking. Some may have been covert agents thinking they were exposing a hijacking ring. They could have all been duped into participating, then knocked out with gas along with the crew and passengers. The Boeings were all equipped with remote control capability, taking them to their real targets with unconscious occupants.

Wouldn't it have been easier just to let them crash the jets?

Yes, that is exactly what this theory proposes.

completed by the A team... no sorry.. by the Mission Impossible team.

Everyone has the right to be free until convicted in a court of law.

What happened to your slander of the pentagon work crews

Not everyone. One person with authority could have planted some strategically placed bombs.

and their installation of a giant "cannon" to shoot debris all over the lawn?

If you read the theory, there is no such cannon. The explosives and force of the impact made the debris go all over the lawn. The official story says the plane entered the Pentagon first. If that is so, then the debris would have shot out the hole in one major direction. You are right in saying it was "all over the lawn".