Pilots For 9/11 Truth Present Their Math

Chillzero,
Is Craig considered banned?
I was under the impression that he is not but just declines to post here.
Are we allowed to post quotes from him from other boards here?
 
Last edited:
Bobert said:
Chillzero,
Is Craig considered banned?
I was under the impression that he is not but just declines to post here.
Are we allowed to post quotes from him from other boards here?
Click to expand...
He is banned.
 
WildCat said:
Looks like Cap'n Bob brought it back.

Has Turbofraud posted his math yet?

No?

I'm shocked!
Click to expand...

The PfT captain has a history of moving threads and posts generated by anyone he deems aGL to skeptics subforum which is hidden to anyone not registered at PfT. Given that he believes that the Shute posters is one of the JREF members he may well have done that and then moved it back for reasons known only to the Cap'n.
 
WildCat said:
It used to be when you quoted from a post that had a pic only the link to the pic would show up, not the pic. Has this changed, or is my memory off?
Click to expand...


It is an option in your User Control Panel (under Options) called Convert to [URL] in Quotes. I can't remember the default setting, but some people have it turned on and some don't.

[/derail]
 
beachnut said:
Ed Paik, he said 77 was near the tower, on the red path! Oops!

CiT cherry picking results in them using Paik's drawing which puts the plane over the Annex. However in the video of Paik he is supposedly standing where he was when he saw the plane. The Navy Annex is not visible and as you point out, he indicates a path along Columbia Pike and states the plane hit or nearly hit the VDOT tower in the background of that video.

the selection of the drawing by CiT then is quite disingenuous at best. Any true 'investigator' would realize that his description does not match that drawing and observe that he could not see the Annex from that location anyway.


Who drew the blue line? [/FONT][/COLOR]

..............
Terry Morin said parallel to the outer edge of the Annex, this means not over the Annex, but next to the annex on a path that hits the lampposts. Reading Morin's statement proves the "official flight path" is true due to the fact the FDR confirms the heading, and true course.
Click to expand...

If the blue line were correct then Morin would not have been able to even see the aircraft once it was halfway over the Annex. However Morin states that he could see the vertical stabilizer all the way to impact. He most certainly does not state that he lost sight of the aircraft as it went over the Annex.

Now we have both Morin and Paik who were basically at opposite ends of the aircraft's travel along Columbia Pike. If Paik's drawing is correct then Morin could not have seen the plane as it passed by him. Several other flight paths drawn by CiT, as per their interpretation of other witnesses, puts the aircraft on paths that neither Paik or Morin could have seen. The location of those witnesses however would enable them to see the plane while it was over Columbia Pike as long as it was a few feet higher than the Annex roofline. Therefore the so-called official flight path is consistent with Paik, Morin and the witnesses who put it closer to themselves than the Annex by mistake.

I find it interesting where in the picture above that Turcois is placed. In the CiT video Craig takes Robert to the north side of the canopy and Robert indicates that the palne was south of that location(points above the canopy). If Robert was at the indicated location and saw the aircraft to the south then he was seeing it along the 'official flight path' since he was under the canopy at the time. Only on Craig's leading does Robert change his story not once but at least twice, each time putting the aircraft further to the north and along a flight path that he could not have even seen from the indicated location.

Well that takes care of about half of the CiT alledged NoC witnesses.
Now for Boger. Could he see the roof of the Citgo station from his location well enough to know that the plane was directly over it or to the north or south slightly? It is not apparenet in anything that the CiT has produced. they did take pictures from the highway and from that location they could see both the heliport control building and the station but that proves nothing other than that the highway is a high point in between the two loactions. Given that they will not get permission to take photos from the heliport control building, they need to go to the east side of the station and take a photo from the level of the roof. If the heliport control building windows are in plain view from that location then, yes Boger could see the station. If they cannot afford a ladder or lift then the alternative is to go further up the hill and, using a level to keep the camera on a horizontal plane, find the location at which they can just see the roof of the station. If the heliport building is visible the Boger has a view of the station roofline.
Click to expand...
 
jaydeehess said:
CiT cherry picking results in them using Paik's drawing which puts the plane over the Annex. However in the video of Paik he is supposedly standing where he was when he saw the plane. The Navy Annex is not visible and as you point out, he indicates a path along Columbia Pike and states the plane hit or nearly hit the VDOT tower in the background of that video.
Click to expand...

Paik is clear regarding this. He stepped out and ducked! When I spoke with his brother at A-One Auto this past September, he confirmed that they heard a noise, Edward stepped outside and then ducked covering his head. His view towards the Pentagon would have been blocked by a building next door to the shop and his time-window was extremely limited (most spent ducking).

Both of the Paik brothers give essentially the same account and Edward gave them the best estimate he could from his point-of-view. How you get from what he said to where CIT did requires a high value for [latex]$$ i $$[/latex].
 
Going to be tricky to post this without violating mod rules, but a certain member of CIT claims that 2 of his expert aviation witnesses, Terry Morin and Sean Boger, have the "final descent" of the airplane they witnessed taking over 10 seconds to go from the Navy Annex to the Pentagon. This puts the plane at 180 mph max, dangerously close to stall speed for a 757.

Good luck banking at that speed so low to the ground, let alone pulling out of a descent.

The more these idiots talk, the more they stick their foots in their mouths.
 
Last edited:
WildCat said:
Going to be tricky to post this without violating mod rules, but a certain member of CIT claims that 2 of his expert aviation witnesses, Terry Morin and Sean Boger, have the "final descent" of the airplane they witnessed taking over 10 seconds to go from the Navy Annex to the Pentagon. This puts the plane at 180 mph max, dangerously close to stall speed for a 757.

Good luck banking at that speed so low to the ground, let alone pulling out of a descent.

The more these idiots talk, the more they stick their foots in their mouths.
Click to expand...

Did you consider that maybe it wasn't a 757 but rather some sort of super secret NWO plane that can do anything necessary for Craig's fantasy?
 
dtugg said:
Did you consider that maybe it wasn't a 757 but rather some sort of super secret NWO plane that can do anything necessary for Craig's fantasy?
Click to expand...

...and we have 9/11-investigator to explain how it works and who built it in minute detail.
 
Given that the TM in general, and the CiT specifically, are not above inventing senarios to fit any data they might come accross into their fantasy. If a lamp post came down then it must have been planted by mysterious 'agents', and in this case, if Boger and Morin say something that would require the plane to be slower then they will invent a different aircraft, possibly painted in the AA scheme, to fit this small part of the reports about the plane. It matters not to them then that other statements describe the aircraft in various fashions that all come down to it being "fast". Undoubtably they will point out that 180 mph is 3 times faster than highway speeds and as such is indeed 'fast'. However humans are very context oriented speakers and in describing an aircraft of any significanmt size, 180 mph is simply never going to described as 'fast'.
 
Last edited:
I think I've figured it out. They used a secret aircraft reverse engineered from the alien craft that crash landed in Roswell in 1947. They had a hologram projected over it to make it look like an American Airlines 757 and had sound projected from it so it sounded like a 757 at full throttle. This single spacecraft/projected hologram was able to fly on both the North and South side approaches simultaneously, but by some magic of alien technology, each witness was only able to see one of the approaches. One path was as described by the CIT witnesses and was made without having to make any almost sideways banking turns or stalling since it is reverse engineered from the aliens. The other went on the "official" flight path knocking down light poles and such. The alien technology also allowed them to do this while only having one set of RADAR tracks. When this spacecraft/projected hologram got near the Pentagon, it fired a force field missile covered with a AA 757 projected hologram and filled with AA 757 parts, a faked FDR, human remains, jet fuel, ect, this force field missile was able to fool all the eyewitnesses and everybody that examined the scene into believing a plane actually hit the Pentagon. As soon as the force field missile was fired, the spaceship went into cloaked mode and was completely invisible, both to human eyes and to RADAR. It flew over the Pentagon, turned west, and flew back to Area 51.

The reason why the did it like that is because they wanted people like CIT and PffffT to discover that plenty of witnesses saw the North side approach. Since the plane couldn't have caused the damage coming from there, the only conclusion, if you rely on the NoC witnesses is that it didn't hit the Pentagon and the light poles were planted. The only place is could go is over the building. But since nobody saw this happen and the whole plan sounds ridiculously insane, pretty much nobody would believe it except for stupid people like CIT/PffffT. The whole operation in addition to getting most people to believe that a plane hit the Pentagon, was also designed to discredit any dissenters, or "truthers," that may come out of the wood work.


Honestly, I think this is more likely than anything Craig or Cap'n Bob have said.
 
Last edited:
Liar!! eleventy11!!

It was reverse engineered alien tech but it actually was installed on a 757 that flew along the 'official flight path', but instead of flying over the Pentagon it implemented a change in the vibartions of its individual mesons allowing it to fly under/through both the Pentagon and the earth and not re-emerge until it reached the Bermuda Triangle. As a side effect of this 'multidimensional meson phase modulation' (MMPM for short) several witnesses perceived the aircraft as being on a path further to the north than the actual path of the aircraft. Had the aircraft been flying away from the Pentagon along Columbia Pike there would have been several witnesses saying it was hundreds of feet south of Columbia Pike once they hit the MMPM switch.

No 'pull up' required, no 'fly over' required just a technology, that is by our understanding, indistinquishable from magic, .
 
Bobert said:
Has anyone posted this revelation by Craig over at ATS. I am curious what they will have to say about this.
Click to expand...

In fact, yes, there was a thread about it at ATS exposing CIT until today. ATS has pulled a Cap'n Bob and deleted the entire thread.

Now, shouldn't a good conspiracy buff conclude that Ranke has ATS in his pocket?
 
Just so I'm clear on this...

Are the CIT the same people who say there was a flyover at the Pentagon even though their own witnesses say the plane hit the Pentagon?
 
CHF said:
Just so I'm clear on this...

Are the CIT the same people who say there was a flyover at the Pentagon even though their own witnesses say the plane hit the Pentagon?
Click to expand...

Yes. They are not very smart.
 
CHF said:
Just so I'm clear on this...

Are the CIT the same people who say there was a flyover at the Pentagon even though their own witnesses say the plane hit the Pentagon?
Click to expand...

In the land of the TM this does not mean that the eyewitnesses are corroborating each other about that aspect, that the plane hit the building.

In that land of sprites and nymphs the only thing that the eyewitnesses interviewed by the CiT (who they are telling anyone about at any rate) are corroborating, is that the plane flew somewhere to the north of the Citgo station and not on the path they refer to as the 'official flight path'. This they claim despite the extreme variance in those NoC paths and the fact that some of paths would preclude other witnesses from even being able to have seen the plane.

In that land of magic the idea that the plane hit the Pentagon is a deception accomplished by having the plane's pulling up and over the building, hidden by the fireball that the supposed impact created. This was accomplished so very well that all eyewitnesses were fooled.

In that land of Nod (NoC?) the same persons who managed such a complete deception could not arrange for an FDR to be found in the 'wreckage' that would definitively indicate that the aircraft flew along the 'official flight path'. Nor could they arrange for the aircraft to actually fly along the 'official flight path' instead of one that took it NoC.

In that land where spooks and agents scurry about unseen, lamp posts that were knocked down to indicate the 'official flight path' were allowed to be knocked down. The same people who managed such a complicated yet complete deception of the aircraft hitting the building somehow allowed the lamp posts to be placed even though they would not indicate the actual flight path of the aircraft nor have a faked FDR to back up the idea that the plane was on the 'official flight path'.

Clear now?
 
Last edited:
Still no sign of the math that pwns us all from the PffffT couch cushion fort.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom