ThePentaCON releases trailer

Arus808 said:
Lyte Trip said:
How many seconds? At 500 mph that's roughly 733 feet per second. That means in just 7.2 seconds the plane would be a mile away. In 36 seconds it would be 5 miles away.

The footage proves NOTHING.[/quyote]
it proves you're a liar.

the video proves that within seconds of hte impact it was being filmed. The family would have stated on the video "hey did you just see that plane fly over!" . none of that reaction by anyone.

why didn't the people traveling on the freeways (that pretty much surround the pentagon) every come forward about seeing a plane fly over?

NO ONE has in the 6 years sicne... why is that lyte?
Click to expand...

Did the family say that they didn't see a plane fly over?

Are you suggesting that because they didn't say this that it means the c-130 didn't exist?

Do you follow me?

Just because they didn't say they didn't see a c-130 or any other plane/jet doesn't mean it didn't exist.

I know there is a skeptic saying for this flawed reasoning.

What is it called?

I'm sure one of you master critical thinkers have the perfectly defined name for this fallacy.
Click to expand...
 
Lyte Trip said:
I will fully admit that your quote of boloboffin made me think you were the one that made the post.

I don't have time to read every single post thoroughly here and you only added one word without editing the quote so I percieved it as being from you.

But you are incorrect in your assumption that we won't post our information here.

1. We won't need to as the members here will post a link to it the very moment it is released. ("Smoking Gun Version" will be DEFINITELY released next week. I promise!)

2. I will most certainly return here for discussions/debate as I firmly believe there are SOME honest members here who will admit that this testimony has convinced them that the plane flew on the north side of the station.
Click to expand...

This does not address my criticism on your lack of an argument- it merely shows that you are intentionally withholding your argument, which is something I've already stated.

I sincerely doubt that 2 will occur. If it does, I will be thoroughly surprised. If you had such evidence, you would post it now. In addition, you may hang around for a few laughs- but you won't be willing to support your position after a few minutes. I am confident it will be debunked, and your "evidence" easily countered, but I can guarantee I will still be here.

I'm not just basing that prediction on what people of your ideological position always do, I'm also basing it on personal experience: you abandoned a very critical discussion some time ago, and left your buddy flapping in the wind. It wasn't too much longer before he disappeared as well. Fact of the matter is- you had to. Faced with a real contradiction of your evidence, you will run away.


Allow me to prove it to you:

What evidence would contradict your fly-over theory? Would scientific data convince you that your theory was wrong?
 
Lyte Trip said:
Arus808 said:
Did the family say that they didn't see a plane fly over?
Click to expand...

dontcha think that would be something they'd be excited about..after all they just saw an "explosion" at the pentagon...and proceeded to record that footage.

Are you suggesting that because they didn't say this that it means the c-130 didn't exist?
Click to expand...

figuring with what they just saw happened, I would say yes; since they didn't mention seeing ANY plane on the video, its safe to assume that there was no plane, otherwise, like normal people who get excited about low flying planes in an area thought to be a no fly zone, and then hearing and witnessing an explosion while on the freeway ;that measn no, your c130 didn't exist as you have been claiming for the last three months.

Do you follow me?
Click to expand...

considering you can't follow logically of why you are so wrong, i rather not follow you anywhere

Just because they didn't say they didn't see a c-130 or any other plane/jet doesn't mean it didn't exist.
Click to expand...

and why would they specifically state it was a c130. Does the average joe schmoe even know what a c130 is?
Click to expand...
 
Totovader said:
What evidence would contradict your fly-over theory? Would scientific data convince you that your theory was wrong?
Click to expand...

How predictably tiresome.

Poppers law of falsifiability!
:rolleyes:

The testimony will cause the jury to rule decisively.
 
Lyte Trip said:
Sue me.

I caught my mistake and edited it.

Funny how the same point still stands.
Click to expand...

No, it does not. As the map I reposted shows, everyone on that side of the road had plenty of time to see a flyover plane. That highway leads right to Washington, Lyte. There should have been dozens of reports of a plane flying over the Pentagon immediately after the explosion.

There are none. Zero. Nada.
 
Arus808 said:
Lyte Trip said:
dontcha think that would be something they'd be excited about..after all they just saw an "explosion" at the pentagon...and proceeded to record that footage.

figuring with what they just saw happened, I would say yes; since they didn't mention seeing ANY plane on the video, its safe to assume that there was no plane, otherwise, like normal people who get excited about low flying planes in an area thought to be a no fly zone, and then hearing and witnessing an explosion while on the freeway ;that measn no, your c130 didn't exist as you have been claiming for the last three months.

considering you can't follow logically of why you are so wrong, i rather not follow you anywhere

and why would they specifically state it was a c130. Does the average joe schmoe even know what a c130 is?
Click to expand...

Actually, if any plane had been flying over the Pentagon, the conclusion would have been inescapable that the plane had bombed the Pentagon. People hear and see an explosion, look to the left, and see a plane flying up and away from the explosion? It would have been the natural assumption!

How many reports of this exist, Lyte? None. Nary. Bupkis.
Click to expand...
 
funny how his "supposed" flight path proves that there was no fly over. because the plane would have to have come in Low enough but then as indicated by his own "map" and animation, it would have to pull so damn hard UPWARD that people would have commented on hearing the engines of this so called plane doing something that dramatic.
\
Instead we have people claming that they heard the engines "gun" it and seeing it hit the pentagon.

Actually, Lyte's mockery of a film will only prove the official account.
 
boloboffin said:
No, it does not. As the map I reposted shows, everyone on that side of the road had plenty of time to see a flyover plane. That highway leads right to Washington, Lyte. There should have been dozens of reports of a plane flying over the Pentagon immediately after the explosion.

There are none. Zero. Nada.
Click to expand...

Untrue.

There were multiple reports of the c-130 "flying over".

Of course we now know this is not what the c-130 did.

I wonder what they were really talking about!
 
Lyte Trip said:
Then we know they caught footage over 60 seconds later so the flyover would be long gone!

Thanks for proving why they didn't catch the flyover.
Click to expand...

This was 1:45 into the video. Says nothing about what they saw earlier before the video started.
 
boloboffin said:
Arus808 said:
Actually, if any plane had been flying over the Pentagon, the conclusion would have been inescapable that the plane had bombed the Pentagon. People hear and see an explosion, look to the left, and see a plane flying up and away from the explosion? It would have been the natural assumption!

How many reports of this exist, Lyte? None. Nary. Bupkis.
Click to expand...

Exactly! They'd be like "HOLY $#~+ did you see that plane bomb the pentagon?~!!! WTF !!!"

when i witnessed an accident where a car took out a light pole (which so happens to be the same accident I told in a previous thread about his mockery of a movie), the first thing i said was "HOLY %$!@ did you see what the #$#$# car DID~~~ WTF? I knew that GUY WAS @#@% drunk!"
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom