Twoofers Only: The Mark Roberts Factual Error Thread

[Jennie C.]

... Dont you people ever give up and just admit to yourself that something with your mind and the way you see the world dont seems right? because you give words new meanings all the time, an intelligent sane person wouldnt do that, would they?. First step, turn OFF the television.

The only things I watch on TV (other than sports) are 24, LOST and Smallville. You mean they AREN'T REAL???

oh no.

 

[Coffee]

The only things I watch on TV (other than sports) are 24, LOST and Smallville. You mean they AREN'T REAL???

oh no.

Come on, just admit that those 3 shows are part of the NWO message system. It is no secret that the super secret NWO secretly places secret cryptic messages in those shows for their secret agents. The secret messages are hidden in the actor's dialog and written on various props throughout the sets. You're not fooling anyone with your innocent TV watching act. Apparently, You're part of the secret NWO wing in Ohio.

 

[Jono]

Come on, just admit that those 3 shows are part of the NWO message system. It is no secret that the super secret NWO secretly places secret cryptic messages in those shows for their secret agents. The secret messages are hidden in the actor's dialog and written on various props throughout the sets. You're not fooling anyone with your innocent TV watching act. Apparently, You're part of the secret NWO wing in Ohio.

Aye, indeedoe, albeit one repetition short (of "secret") to win the customized NWO coffee-cup.

 

[Belz...]

The only things I watch on TV (other than sports) are 24, LOST and Smallville. You mean they AREN'T REAL???

oh no.

I don't even watch television anymore. Some brainwashing, eh ?

 

[lisabob2]

1. You heard???

2. The government photos and evidence is fake? Well there in lies the paranoid disclaimer that allows village idiots to become truthers. If it does not agree with the Conspiracy Theory, then clearly it was fake or tampered with.

3. There are a number of pilots and aircraft Technicians on this forum who would contest your proclamation that a 757/767 can't fly below 1000 feet.

TAM

I believe thats what truth movement is tryin to do. Also many family members of victims are pushing for indepnedent investigation.

 

[lisabob2]

1. You heard???

2. The government photos and evidence is fake? Well there in lies the paranoid disclaimer that allows village idiots to become truthers. If it does not agree with the Conspiracy Theory, then clearly it was fake or tampered with.

3. There are a number of pilots and aircraft Technicians on this forum who would contest your proclamation that a 757/767 can't fly below 1000 feet.

TAM

I said a 757 or 767 cannot attain high speeds below a certain height, not that they could not fly. They can fly, they just can't stay stable at high speeds until they reach a certain altitude. I knew test pilots & engineers at Boeing, and this fact has been verified by them. They have all said a 767 flying below 700 ft at 500 mph was impossible, it would be uncontrollable. Since they are experts it would take a physical test to show that they are wrong to have me believe otherwise. I find it hard to believe that they don't know what they are talking about.

 

[lisabob2]

those pics are not evidence of anything but damage at ground zero. Jones said the core columns pic is curious but more test would have to be done on the core column. He did not jump to any conclusions about that pic. He has done scientific tests that he says suggest thermate was used and his hypothesis was that it or some other incenderary was used to weaken the steel columns. What scientific tests were done to prove him wrong?

I never saw or heard Jones make those claims. I have heard him say more test need to be done. I have heard him say he has a hypothesis. And nothing you have posted proves anything Jones has said is wrong or unscientific

 

[DGM]

I said a 757 or 767 cannot attain high speeds below a certain height, not that they could not fly. They can fly, they just can't stay stable at high speeds until they reach a certain altitude. I knew test pilots & engineers at Boeing, and this fact has been verified by them. They have all said a 767 flying below 700 ft at 500 mph was impossible, it would be uncontrollable. Since they are experts it would take a physical test to show that they are wrong to have me believe otherwise. I find it hard to believe that they don't know what they are talking about.

So you believe that it was not a pair of air planes that hit the towers?

 

[lisabob2]

You are getting mixed up with the different crash sites




Same old crap. Anything that is produced is fake regardless of where it came from. Give it a rest.




Now you are just lying. please stop it. You are ignorant about aircraft and there are many pilots and technicians who know more that you on this site who say you are wrong. If you keep repeating this mistake then you are lying. There are many videos on youtube of aircraft like these flying at fast speeds at low levels. None of them crashed. The ones on 911 did.

If you are going to continue with this feeble attampt at being a truther at least read some of the threads on this site first and stop rehashing the same old crap. You are poor at this even by truther standards

Now you are just lying. please stop it. You are ignorant about aircraft and there are many pilots and technicians who know more that you on this site who say you are wrong. If you keep repeating this mistake then you are lying. There are many videos on youtube of aircraft like these flying at fast speeds at low levels. None of them crashed. The ones on 911 did.
I know test pilots & engineers at Boeing. They confirm the fact that 767/757 do not fly at high speeds unless they are at a certain altitude. At lower altitudes they become un flyable according to them. Actually look it up
www. youtube. com/watch?v=x2upl977dsY
Joseph Keith, a retired Boeing engineer:
"Boeing 757 cannot go faster than 330mph at 700ft altitude because air resistance is too "thick" at that speed. Air resistance causes the engines turbines to stop and the airplane starts to shake so hard it will break apart."
Facts seem to agree with me

 

[bynmdsue]

Joseph Keith, a retired Boeing engineer:
"Boeing 757 cannot go faster than 330mph at 700ft altitude because air resistance is too "thick" at that speed. Air resistance causes the engines turbines to stop and the airplane starts to shake so hard it will break apart."
Facts seem to agree with me

Then I guess it's a good thing they ran into some buildings before they shook apart.

Hey Kiddo,crashing airplanes is not that hard.Accept it.Move on.

 

[fezzic]

From reading part of an interview it would seem that Mr. Keith is also a no-second planer.

Also note that the interview identifies that Joseph Keith as a retired software engineer not, as might be inferred from his having retired from Boeing or the aeronautical industry, an aeronautical engineer.

 

[T.A.M.]

how long was the plane below a height of 700 feet? how many seconds?

As for who was the right info or not, I will trust the pilots and engineers on this forum any day, over those you likely get your info from.

Joseph Keith - original founding member of 911group SPINE. PAAALLLEAAASSSEEE!!!!

TAM

 

[Corsair 115]

I said a 757 or 767 cannot attain high speeds below a certain height, not that they could not fly.

Yes, you've said that, but when asked for the source or sources for such information you reply with the rather vague:

I knew test pilots & engineers at Boeing, and this fact has been verified by them.

Surely you can either a) list the names of these individuals and the specific statements they agree with in regards to the physical capabilities of the aircraft, or b) list the specific capabilities of the aircraft as stated in any publically available official documentation.

I could just as easily say I knew some test pilots and engineers at Boeing who emphatically disagree with your claim. Who should readers believe, me or you, without some sort of additional verification?

 

[Gravy]

Joseph Keith? The pilots on this forum who've flown Boeing mediums and heavies, such as beachnut (KC-135/707) and B-Man (747) say his claim is sheer nonsense. So does this video. The TAP Airbus is doing 434 mph.

Google Video This video is not hosted by the ISF, the ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

 

[Panoply_Prefect]

Heiwa has just made the same claim over at Flashback.info:

(translated)

According to videos it approaches at a speed of >800-900 km/h at 200 meters altitude and the question is if an ordinary commercial airliner can fly that fast at that low altitude. The air is much thicker down there (1.3kg/m3) than at 10,000-11,000 meter (0.3 kg/m3) where they normally fly at max speed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2upl977dsY

The answer appears to be that the airplane cant fly that fast at that low altitude. It would have broken apart (the air is to thick).

(The source appears to be Joseph Keith in the video)

Interesting how these things seem to surface at the same time all over.

Found this, could someone who knows this stuff explain to me what it means:

http://www.democraticunderground.co...um=125&topic_id=175931&mesg_id=176559#176559]

 

[funk de fino]

I know test pilots & engineers at Boeing. They confirm the fact that 767/757 do not fly at high speeds unless they are at a certain altitude. At lower altitudes they become un flyable according to them. Actually look it up
www. youtube. com/watch?v=x2upl977dsY
Joseph Keith, a retired Boeing engineer:
"Boeing 757 cannot go faster than 330mph at 700ft altitude because air resistance is too "thick" at that speed. Air resistance causes the engines turbines to stop and the airplane starts to shake so hard it will break apart."
Facts seem to agree with me

Liar

I am an ex aircraft technician of 12 years experience in all aircraft systems. I know more than you ansd the stupid software guy you have quoted. They can do those speeds and can crash into buldings. Obviously its not adviseable but i do not think the hijackers cared much.

Lying again, does not look good pal, very poor effort

 

[Jono]

Found this, could someone who knows this stuff explain to me what it means:

http://www.democraticunderground.co...um=125&topic_id=175931&mesg_id=176559#176559]

While I am no expert, only a man whose plane-mechanic uncle liked to talk for hours about engineering flaws he had found, heh.

The above tidbit is no mystery though, I shouldn't think, it merely asserts stress-related boundaries and measurements for safety.
So, should we sue the hijackers for having flown the planes carelessly and with little concern for the extended safety of the plane?

 

[Panoply_Prefect]

The above tidbit is no mystery though, I shouldn't think, it merely asserts stress-related boundaries and measurements for safety.
So, should we sue the hijackers for having flown the planes carelessly and with little concern for the extended safety of the plane?

Obviously not. My point was that that scan shows that the safety speed of the aircraft, possibly taken from the flight manual, and that that figure is way above what the software engineer PfT like to quote states. What I dont know is at what altitude. From the same board I quoted:

It says the following information is from the Aircraft Flight Manual for a 767:
Vmo @ MSL - 360 kts / Mmo - 0.86 Mach

That is about 414 mph at Mean Sea Level. Much faster than the 220 mph and 330 mph absolute maximum speed limitations claimed by Joseph Keith.

Im not sure what Mean Sea Level is, but according to Wiki its the same as sea level, which should more or less equal ground level on Manhattan, no?

True or MSL (mean sea level) is the next best measurement to absolute - and in some ways better. MSL tells you how far you are above an imaginary line at sea level. If you then know the elevation of terrain, the next step is to determine how far you are above ground. It also tells you how thin the air is, which determines your physiological response to that altitude. True Altitude (MSL) has been adjusted for local high or low pressure conditions. FL or Flight Level is another related term that is measured in hundreds of feet. At a standard pressure that correlates to 18,000 feet, the flight level is one-eight-zero.

 

[apathoid]

Joseph Keith, a retired Boeing engineer:

"Boeing 757 cannot go faster than 330mph at 700ft altitude because air resistance is too "thick" at that speed. Air resistance causes the engines turbines to stop and the airplane starts to shake so hard it will break apart."

Facts seem to agree with me

This "fact" is so moronic, it's laughable to people who actually know a thing or two about jet engines. Turbines don't stall or surge, compressors do. Oh and it's lack of intake air which causes these compressor stalls, not too much air. Jets love lots and lots of thick, dense air.

BTW Joseph Keith is a software engineer. You are no less qualified to opine on this topic than he is...

I knew test pilots & engineers at Boeing, and this fact has been verified by them.

There are 20,000 Boeing and Airbus aircraft being flown by 200,000 airline pilots. Why haven't they come forward? If the official story is so aboviously a farce from an airline pilots perspective, why does the Airline Pilots Association still have a bounty on Bin Ladens head?

As beachnut would say: "Go get some facts."

 

[apathoid]

Joseph Keith? The pilots on this forum who've flown Boeing mediums and heavies, such as beachnut (KC-135/707) and B-Man (747) say his claim is sheer nonsense. So does this video. The TAP Airbus is doing 434 mph.

Google Video This video is not hosted by the ISF, the ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

C'mon, just who are you trying to fool Gravy? Those planes are clearly going takeoff/landing speed. Nice try...