The PF9/11 Truth Video

[angrysoba]

It seems that two of my co-workers are Truthers. I had thought this was dying out but it seems there may be a new generation of them.

Anyway, I've been sent a video of what one of my co-workers thinks is the most compelling argument for saying that the "official story" is wrong and having watched two and half parts of it I am somewhat staggered by the banality of Rob Balsamo (I take it he's the one narrating).

I'll post a bit of our correspondence:

Watch these videos. I'd like to hear you take on them.

Here's part 1 of 5.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUbVbmpblFk

I think it is impossible to refute what they say.

So, I decided to watch it...

I see that sources from Rense.com (an anti-semitic conspiracy theory site) and Counterpunch are being used as evidence for the recovery of the black boxes. Personally I don't find these sources very convincing. If I remember rightly there were numerous victims in the attacks who were never positively identified because they didn't discover any of their body parts (maybe up to 1000 of them). But the most important thing is that although there are web pages on the Internet saying the black boxes had been found it seems that DeMasi and Bellone are the sources. Are they trustworthy? Bellone is actually a charlatan. He pretends to be a firefighter and yet he isn't one. This doesn't stop Lindorff in the Counterpunch article from calling him one: "There has always been some skepticism about this assertion [that the black boxes were never found], particularly as two N.Y. City firefighters, Mike Bellone and Nicholas De Masi, claimed in 2004 that they had found three of the four boxes, and that Federal agents took them and told the two men not to mention having found them. (The FBI denies the whole story.) "

9/11 Myths has something on the black boxes here:

http://www.911myths.com/index.php/The_Black_Boxes

To be honest I don't get what his point is about the speed of the plane. Apparently mach 1 is supposed to be well over 600 knots at sea level. The speed of Flt 11 and 175 were supposedly over 500 knots but I didn't get why he starts chuckling about how that makes it over mach one. He's already explained that the data that the ATSB (?) were using were not necessarily accurate as they didn't have the black box data and had to be estimated. But instead he starts chuckling again and asking if the modifications to the plane that would be necessary had been done by the Arabs in their caves. (This is really irritating! The people who flew the planes were fairly well-off middle class men with educations and pilot's licenses. They weren't troglodytes.)

It seems like a dumb argument. That the "official government" story involves making up speeds that a 767 couldn't achieve and that it must have been a modified plane. Modified how? With stronger wings? It was demonstrably a 767, it would have been even more insane for the US government to fly in a plane that isn't a 767 and yet to claim it was one. And what purpose could be achieved by modifying the plane? Conspiracy theorists seem to believe that conspirators are always dreaming up completely pointless embellishments like this on the logic that if they can prove there was pointless embellishment X then the "official story" falls apart and leaves the field open to simply making up an alternative narrative like "Da gubmint dunnit!"

I watched two parts of it but got bored of his droning voice and irritating chuckling. FAIL!

I don't really understand Balsamo's argument and am having trouble seeing what his point is. It seems like one of the crappiest premises of a 9/11 conspiracy theory I have ever heard (although he takes a leaf out of Richard Gage's book and pretends he has no theory about 9/11).

Anyway, my co-worker wrote back:

Actually I think they do an excellent job explaining how it was impossible with the data provided and how experienced professional pilot couldn't do what was supposedly done with the commercial plane.

I suggest watching another 30 minutes to the end.

So, I asked:

So, you think it wasn't a 767 that crashed into the World Trade Center?

Or it was a modified one?

If this is true then what happened to the actual AA 11 and UA 175? Where are the passengers?

Apologies if there is already a thread on this video. I couldn't find a thread which dealt with precisely this video.

Also, I have little to no knowledge about flying and can't work out what it is Balsamo thinks he has discovered. It seems like he has made an artform out of pettiness.

 

[BCR]

Where do I start? You might want to tell your friend that even the most ardent 'truthers' who are engineers (such as Gage) say that P4T (Cpt'n Bob) are full of crap. So since your friend probably won't listen to a government disinfo 'debunker', just point him to what the 'truthers' have to say about them.

Personally I have not wasted my time watching their latest. I don't think my blood pressure could take it.

 

[angrysoba]

Where do I start? You might want to tell your friend that even the most ardent 'truthers' who are engineers (such as Gage) say that P4T (Cpt'n Bob) are full of crap. So since your friend probably won't listen to a government disinfo 'debunker', just point him to what the 'truthers' have to say about them.

Personally I have not wasted my time watching their latest. I don't think my blood pressure could take it.

Well, I'd never watched any of the Pilots for 9/11 Truth stuff before as I've pretty much had my fill from watching Loose Change, 9/11 Mysteries, the Richard Gage presentation and Zeitgeist. I really think that should be more than anyone should have to ever see but with Truthers and conspiracy theorists in general there are always more videos that you absolutely MUST watch and all the others are disinfo. (Actually I don't think my co-workers are completely down the rabbit hole yet. They were even surprised when I told them that WTC7 had been burning for seven hours. They seemed to think it had collapsed immediately after the Twin Towers).

When I questioned the credentials of AE9/11 Truth and just how many of them were actually qualified structural engineers my co-worker sent me the website "Patriots Question 9/11" or something. I spent a bit too much time working my way through the list:

On Patriots Question 9/11 the first name on the list is a real howler

Major General Albert Stubblebine, U.S. Army (ret)
This is the guy who was featured in Jon Ronson's book, The Men Who Stare at Goats. He believed that he could walk through the walls using the logic that we're just atoms and the wall is just atoms so basically the atoms should just pass by each other as we're mostly empty space. He also thought he could stop a goat's heart by staring at it and wanted to train a bunch of soldiers to become invisible at will and read minds etc...

General Wesley Clark, U.S. Army (ret)
Is not a Truther. Truthers do this type of thing all the time though. If someone says that they want to see someone fired for faulty intelligence or they think the investigation protected senior figures instead of revealing their incompetence then they get lumped in with Truthers. Wesley Clark believes al-Qaeda was responsible.

Commander Ted Muga, BS CE, U.S. Navy (ret)
His argument just seems to be, "I can't believe he managed to pull off that maneuvre even if it is possible." It's the arument from incredulity. The thing is that Hani Hanjour wasn't flying normally and he had no interest in preserving the plane since his idea was to crash it. Plenty of witnesses said they saw the plane being steered crazily. This is what I would expect for an amateur. Also his flight instructor said he had no problem believing he could have flown the plane into the Pentagon.

Barbara Honegger, MS
She's a serial conspiracy theorist.

Wayne Madsen
Ditto

Commander James R. Compton, III, U.S. Navy (ret)
He's praising the Citizens Investigation Team. As far as I know this is one of the weirdest conspiracy theories. They believe the actual 757 was there but it flew OVER the Pentagon by about five metres and then a missile was fired at the Pentagon and then some airplane parts were scattered around the impact zone. Apparently nobody knows where the plane went.

Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer, U.S. Army Reserve (ret)
This guy isn't really a full-on Truther. He believes that al-Qaeda did it, as far as I know, but that there are questions about the competence of the Bush administration officials.

Capt. Stephen M. Gann, PhD, U.S. Navy Reserve (ret)

"Having witnessed the collapse of the second tower on television, I noticed brilliant white flashes on the lower floors immediately before collapse. Why was that? Why was that film clip never seen on TV again?"

Because there weren't any. All of the major TV stations archived all their film of the day and they can be seen online. There were no flashes. He's obviously seeing things.

"During clean up at site zero, there was radioactivity detected, radionuclides that could only be present from a fission event. But due to the general public lack of understanding of nuclear "stuff", this was passed off as a result of the intense heat of the fire, a scientifically impossible scenario. I would, as a nuclear chemist, like for this particular anomaly to be properly explained."

I think he's making this up. The towers were not demolished by nukes. Surely that is pretty obvious.

Michael Scheuer, PhD
Is not a Truther. He was part of the bin Laden Unit of the CIA and he thinks bin Laden did it. His main beef is with the "cowardly politicians" who wouldn't order bin Laden's assassination or turning the Middle East to glass.

Milton Bearden
He's not really a Truther either. In fact, if anything he explodes some of the myths that Truthers like to tell such as:

"I feel slightly uncomfortable because I spent so many years wondering how the myth of Osama bin Laden got started. We have the Osama bin Laden who was the great war hero in Afghanistan. We have Osama bin Laden who was trained by CIA, funded and supported by CIA during three years of war. I was there at the same time bin Laden was there. He was not the great warrior that went and fought the Soviet Union to a standstill. The CIA had nothing to do with him."

Senator Max Cleland
He's not a Truther.

Gov. Jesse Ventura
Oh dear! Ventura's TV show is pretty embarrassing. Here's a funny video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nrGxzsxSqMk

I think it is fair to say that the Ventura Conspiracy Theory show is utterly dishonest in how its presentation.

Vladamir Putin
"Russian President Vladimir Putin has said publicly that he ordered his intelligence agencies to alert the United States last summer [2001] that suicide pilots were training for attacks on U.S. targets."

Well, that somewhat debunks the inside job, doesn't it?

Gen. Hosni Mubarak
Tun Dr. Mahathir bin Mohamad
What is not included on that page is that Mahatir Mohammad thinks 9/11 was done by "The Jews". Why? Well, because that's what Jews do, right? He's an utter loony.

John J. Farmer, Jr.
Most certainly not a Truther.

Anyway, the problem is that because I don't know enough about so many of the others I can't be sure how many of them are genuine Truthers and whether or not the questions they have can be answered easily or not. I don't really trust that website though because I can see that some of it is padded.

 

[angrysoba]

Where do I start? You might want to tell your friend that even the most ardent 'truthers' who are engineers (such as Gage) say that P4T (Cpt'n Bob) are full of crap.

Actually I would be grateful for any links of Gage saying Balsamo's full of crap.

 

[BCR]

Just follow the thread I just bumped for you. P4T is crying about Gage and someone else has a whole thread here about it somewhere. Gotta run off to work right now myself, so no time to pull it up for you.

 

[angrysoba]

Just follow the thread I just bumped for you. P4T is crying about Gage and someone else has a whole thread here about it somewhere. Gotta run off to work right now myself, so no time to pull it up for you.

Okay, thanks very much.

I'll look through it.

 

[BCR]

Bumped the other one for you.

 

[Reheat]

I only watched about a minute of the video and won't be going back to it again. It actually makes me sick to my stomach to watch the crap. However, I've heard the arguments and I'm sure there is nothing new in this piece of garbage from pffft.

Most laymen don't have the knowledge or ability to even understand what the idiot contends, let alone refute it. He uses "appeal to authority" throughout and if one assumes the premise is correct it is difficult to refute. The problem is the basic premise is not an absolute.

The bastard twists and turns facts to fit his mold somewhat similar to, but not quite as stupid as the "clowns investigation team" which he supports.

He attempts to convince the reader of aeronautical absolutes when, in fact, he stretches his "evidence" by twisting just enough to convince the layman with his typical techno-babble.

It should be obvious that what he's contending is purely theoretical, but out of the other side of his mouth he states they have no theory, but only use facts. That is a BLATANT LIE.

Most (if not all) of this stuff has been addressed here already in various threads, so it's nothing new or revolutionary.

Similar to what Gage does (as well as other twoofer organizations) anyone who has ever expressed any questions or doubts about the events of 9/11 goes on their list as a member or supporter. A little research beyond the surface will show that most of his group have purely political motivations. Several are established long-time misfits, some even fringe lunatics.

I'm not going to watch one of his stupid videos again, but if various questions arise I'll try to address them again as I have time. I'm sure beachnut will be along soon and address them, as well.

Again, this stuff has been discussed at length already, so please forgive me for not being enthusiastic about going through it again.

 

[sheeplesnshills]

Where do I start? You might want to tell your friend that even the most ardent 'truthers' who are engineers (such as Gage) say that P4T (Cpt'n Bob) are full of crap. So since your friend probably won't listen to a government disinfo 'debunker', just point him to what the 'truthers' have to say about them.

Personally I have not wasted my time watching their latest. I don't think my blood pressure could take it.

Gage is NOT an engineer! he is an architect, essentially an artist, they decide what a building should look like but the serious "engineering" is done by Structural Engineers.


I, however, am a mech Eng and yes P4T are full of steaming crap. Balsamo is a (failed) pilot, he has never flown big jets and even if he had that does not mean he has a clue about the engineering limitations of a big jet as they are trained to avoid getting even close to them!

 

[Animal]

Gage is NOT an engineer! he is an architect, essentially an artist, they decide what a building should look like but the serious "engineering" is done by Structural Engineers.


I, however, am a mech Eng and yes P4T are full of steaming crap. Balsamo is a (failed) pilot, he has never flown big jets and even if he had that does not mean he has a clue about the engineering limitations of a big jet as they are trained to avoid getting even close to them!

Not exactly true.......my architectural license allows me to design the building structures as well as mechanical and electrical to "the extent of my competence" (In practice, I rarely do however because it is far quicker to have engineers to the work that they do every day.) "Artist" is one of the least applicable descriptions of what I do.

What Gage is doing is basically a "make work" project for someone that cannot survive in the real world.

 

[Childlike Empress]

He attempts to convince the reader of aeronautical absolutes when, in fact, he stretches his "evidence" by twisting just enough to convince the layman with his typical techno-babble.

Fine show of projection there, Reheat. That's exactly what you do in the deceptive piece of junk science you link to in your signature - debunked about three years ago but still peddled by 911myths.

 

[BCR]

Oh my, I think I have hurt Cpt'n Bob's feelings again

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=21125&pid=10795494&st=20&#entry10795494

 

[Reheat]

Fine show of projection there, Reheat. That's exactly what you do in the deceptive piece of junk science you link to in your signature - debunked about three years ago but still peddled by 911myths.

Wrong. Your heroes have debunked nothing. Last I checked the laws of aerodynamics haven't been changed by your idiot heroes. They do exactly what you do, fill pages of internet Forums with crap and delusions.

 

[Reheat]

BTW CE,

You haven't brought us up to date on "Operation Accountability". I understand it's not going well.

 

[Childlike Empress]

Wrong. Your heroes have debunked nothing. Last I checked the laws of aerodynamics haven't been changed by your idiot heroes. They do exactly what you do, fill pages of internet Forums with crap and delusions.

You have no data to plug into your formula. You made it up by taking parts of witness testimonies over literal while ignoring other parts. Out of this you construct an artificial impossible scenario and run it through your formula to prove that it is impossible. Then you turn around and claim that the same witnesses you cherrypicked couldn't have seen what they report at all and would be mistaken about such a basic detail as the side on which they saw the plane pass. BS in, BS out. The OP of the thread I linked is a more than sufficient debunk. A few lines like those I just have written would have sufficed.

 

[Sam.I.Am]

And yet amazingly enough every single CIT witness states that they saw the airplane crash into the pentagon while PFFT claims that a performing a maneuver that was the equivalent of landing an airplane is impossible even for a skilled pilot.

And you wonder why people laugh at people like you.

 

[Childlike Empress]

And yet

Wait a minute - you admit that Reheat's piece is junk science?

 

[Andy_Ross]

Still banging the broken drum CE?

 

[Childlike Empress]

Wrong. Your heroes have debunked nothing. Last I checked the laws of aerodynamics haven't been changed by your idiot heroes. They do exactly what you do, fill pages of internet Forums with crap and delusions.

You have no data to plug into your formula. You made it up by taking parts of witness testimonies over literal while ignoring other parts. Out of this you construct an artificial impossible scenario and run it through your formula to prove that it is impossible. Then you turn around and claim that the same witnesses you cherrypicked couldn't have seen what they report at all and would be mistaken about such a basic detail as the side on which they saw the plane pass. BS in, BS out. The OP of the thread I linked is a more than sufficient debunk. A few lines like those I just have written would have sufficed.

The bolded in his own projecting words:

He attempts to convince the reader of aeronautical absolutes when, in fact, he stretches his "evidence" by twisting just enough to convince the layman with his typical techno-babble.

 

[Reheat]

You have no data to plug into your formula. You made it up by taking parts of witness testimonies over literal while ignoring other parts. Out of this you construct an artificial impossible scenario and run it through your formula to prove that it is impossible. Then you turn around and claim that the same witnesses you cherrypicked couldn't have seen what they report at all and would be mistaken about such a basic detail as the side on which they saw the plane pass. BS in, BS out. The OP of the thread I linked is a more than sufficient debunk. A few lines like those I just have written would have sufficed.

Data? Data, you say? You must be addressing the pure unadulterated spin (crrap) that distorts what both Paik and Morin stated. I can read the English Language, CE, and I certainly don't need either Ranke or you to tell me what someone said.

It has absolutely nothing to do with which side of anything the aircraft passed because the aircraft can not get to those points at all. Even if it could, NO ONE, NOT a single ONE described the horrendous bank angle required to do so.

It's too late to try to put words into those folks mouths, so don't even try. Your crap might work in your make believe world, but not in the real world and the fact that you and you cohorts can't convince more than a deluded few substantiates that. Now about "Operation Accountability"? Why don't you want to talk about the results of that farce?