| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
A Sharp Major
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 19 Feb 2006
Posts: 237
Location: In the van with the blacked out windows, parked outside your home.
|
 Posted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 9:29 am Post subject: The Year in Review |
 |
|
I've just resumed posting after a year doing other stuff. What has happened in the truthiness movement in that time? A resume of what I've noticed follows.
Former professor Steven Jones admits that he (and the truth movement) got the duration of WTC 7's collapse wrong. 'We blew it'. Bermas still doesn't believe it even though he's been shown the same evidence that swayed Jones.
David Shayler. Not just an ex MI5 agent but the messiah. The truthiness movement swalled him hook line and sinker.
Kevin Ryan. His law suit against UL was dismissed before it went to court-twice. Case (he didn't have one) closed.
Ryan Mackey's paper demoishes David Ray Griffn's 'theory' and more importantly, his methods, logic and ethics. No science needed to get value from Mackey's paper, it's a very easy read.
Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. I'll discuss them elsewhere. The bottom 0.001 percent of the professions with faulty logic, few if any calculations which is why they build cow sheds, not skyscrapers. That's why they are bringing up the rear.
Loose Changed again. It's catching up on the Rocky series but has more in common intellectually with the Police Academy series.
9/11 Truth. No science, no engineering, no evidence, no integrity, no intellect, no idea, no planes, no hope, no case.
_________________
"It's been my policy to view the Internet not as an 'information highway,' but as an electronic asylum filled with babbling loonies.” Mike Royko
http://www.screwloosechange.blogspot.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
KP50
Validated Poster
Joined: 23 Feb 2007
Posts: 526
Location: NZ
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 12:12 pm Post subject: Re: The Year in Review |
|
|
| A Sharp Major wrote: | I've just resumed posting after a year doing other stuff. What has happened in the truthiness movement in that time? A resume of what I've noticed follows.
Former professor Steven Jones admits that he (and the truth movement) got the duration of WTC 7's collapse wrong. 'We blew it'. Bermas still doesn't believe it even though he's been shown the same evidence that swayed Jones.
David Shayler. Not just an ex MI5 agent but the messiah. The truthiness movement swalled him hook line and sinker.
Kevin Ryan. His law suit against UL was dismissed before it went to court-twice. Case (he didn't have one) closed.
Ryan Mackey's paper demoishes David Ray Griffn's 'theory' and more importantly, his methods, logic and ethics. No science needed to get value from Mackey's paper, it's a very easy read.
Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. I'll discuss them elsewhere. The bottom 0.001 percent of the professions with faulty logic, few if any calculations which is why they build cow sheds, not skyscrapers. That's why they are bringing up the rear.
Loose Changed again. It's catching up on the Rocky series but has more in common intellectually with the Police Academy series.
9/11 Truth. No science, no engineering, no evidence, no integrity, no intellect, no idea, no planes, no hope, no case. |
Yet another who seems to think this is a popularity contest. Have you tried taking a look at the FDR data for both the Pentagon and Shanksville? Take a stab at how the data supplied from the FDRs confirms the events of 9/11. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Alex_V
Wrecker
Joined: 24 Sep 2007
Posts: 515
Location: London, England
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 1:00 pm Post subject: Re: The Year in Review |
|
|
| KP50 wrote: | | Yet another who seems to think this is a popularity contest. Have you tried taking a look at the FDR data for both the Pentagon and Shanksville? Take a stab at how the data supplied from the FDRs confirms the events of 9/11. |
Another request that critics of the truth movement go and do the legwork - it's as if you can't be bothered to do any research of your own.
I remain fairly convinced that most in the truth movement have no idea what the FDRs suggest, and that merely questioning it is enough to suggest a conspiracy.
I would add to A Sharp Major's list the withdrawal of accusations over the flightpath of flight 75 from Pilots for Truth, based on another of Ryan Mackey's investigations of truther 'evidence'. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KP50
Validated Poster
Joined: 23 Feb 2007
Posts: 526
Location: NZ
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 8:18 pm Post subject: Re: The Year in Review |
|
|
| Alex_V wrote: | | KP50 wrote: | | Yet another who seems to think this is a popularity contest. Have you tried taking a look at the FDR data for both the Pentagon and Shanksville? Take a stab at how the data supplied from the FDRs confirms the events of 9/11. |
Another request that critics of the truth movement go and do the legwork - it's as if you can't be bothered to do any research of your own.
I remain fairly convinced that most in the truth movement have no idea what the FDRs suggest, and that merely questioning it is enough to suggest a conspiracy.
I would add to A Sharp Major's list the withdrawal of accusations over the flightpath of flight 75 from Pilots for Truth, based on another of Ryan Mackey's investigations of truther 'evidence'. |
What does it suggest then?
And what is Flight 75? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Alex_V
Wrecker
Joined: 24 Sep 2007
Posts: 515
Location: London, England
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 8:33 pm Post subject: Re: The Year in Review |
|
|
| KP50 wrote: | | What does it suggest then? |
And there you go again lol. I'm not holding your hand - if you want to make a claim, go and find out what claims are available to make. Don't just ask me to find one for you.
| Quote: | | And what is Flight 75? |
77. Apologies. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KP50
Validated Poster
Joined: 23 Feb 2007
Posts: 526
Location: NZ
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 9:44 pm Post subject: Re: The Year in Review |
|
|
| Alex_V wrote: | | KP50 wrote: | | What does it suggest then? |
And there you go again lol. I'm not holding your hand - if you want to make a claim, go and find out what claims are available to make. Don't just ask me to find one for you.
|
No, no, no - you made the claim - as you have done previously. You said the "truth movement" has no idea about the FDR. So what does it suggest? Are you suggesting that it backs up the OCT? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Alex_V
Wrecker
Joined: 24 Sep 2007
Posts: 515
Location: London, England
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 11:34 pm Post subject: Re: The Year in Review |
|
|
| KP50 wrote: | | No, no, no - you made the claim - as you have done previously. You said the "truth movement" has no idea about the FDR. So what does it suggest? Are you suggesting that it backs up the OCT? |
Well an FDR was found in the wreckage at the Pentagon - that gives you a very big clue that it should back up the OT to at least some extent. How an FDR found in the wreckage of the Pentagon should back up any theory that the flight never crashed at the Pentagon is beyond me.
From what I have read about FDR data in general, and the interpretation of it, I would be very wary of making any grand claims that FDRs DEFINITELY corroborate the OT. Just as I would that they definitely do not. As I understand it there are a huge number of different variables recorded, and the interpretation of such data is more of a subjective art than you might expect.
Also, as I understand it, Pilots For Truth has had to recently withdraw some of its accusations about the Pentagon FDR after miscalculations were made, so I'm not 100% sure where the debate stands at this time, in that I'm not sure what the truth movement are claiming about it.
The claims I would make are that the FDRs are from the crashed planes, and as such confirm that they did crash, and that as it stands there is no direct evidence that they are either false, or contain data that directly supports any different flightpaths. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KP50
Validated Poster
Joined: 23 Feb 2007
Posts: 526
Location: NZ
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2008 4:04 am Post subject: Re: The Year in Review |
|
|
| Alex_V wrote: | Well an FDR was found in the wreckage at the Pentagon - that gives you a very big clue that it should back up the OT to at least some extent. How an FDR found in the wreckage of the Pentagon should back up any theory that the flight never crashed at the Pentagon is beyond me.
|
Who knows whether the data provided came from an FDR found at the Pentagon. Popular Mechanics seems happy with this statement :-
| Quote: | | "It was absolutely a plane, and I'll tell you why," says Kilsheimer, CEO of KCE Structural Engineers PC, Washington, D.C. "I saw the marks of the plane wing on the face of the building. I picked up parts of the plane with the airline markings on them. I held in my hand the tail section of the plane, and I found the black box." Kilsheimer's eyewitness account is backed up by photos of plane wreckage inside and outside the building. Kilsheimer adds: "I held parts of uniforms from crew members in my hands, including body parts. Okay?" |
while MSNBC had already reported on 14/11
| Quote: | | Early Friday morning, shortly before 4 a.m., Burkhammer and another firefighter, Brian Moravitz, were combing through debris near the impact site. Peering at the wreckage with their helmet lights, the two spotted an intact seat from the plane’s cockpit with a chunk of the floor still attached. Then they saw two odd-shaped dark boxes, about 1.5 by 2 feet long. They’d been told the plane’s “black boxes” would in fact be bright orange, but these were charred black. The boxes had handles on one end and one was torn open. They cordoned off the area and called for an FBI agent, who in turn called for someone from the National Transportation Safety Board who confirmed the find: the black boxes from American Airlines Flight 77. “We wanted to find live victims,” says Burkhammer. But this was a consolation prize. “Finding the black box gave us a little boost,” he says. |
Both accounts cannot be correct and neither of them provide any proof for an FDR in the rubble and neither of them prove that the FDR data supplied came from the FDR allegedly found in either account.
| Alex_V wrote: |
From what I have read about FDR data in general, and the interpretation of it, I would be very wary of making any grand claims that FDRs DEFINITELY corroborate the OT. Just as I would that they definitely do not. As I understand it there are a huge number of different variables recorded, and the interpretation of such data is more of a subjective art than you might expect.
|
It is readings of various parameters - the whole point is that it is not subjective, it just requires some knowledge of flying to interpret.
| Alex_V wrote: | Also, as I understand it, Pilots For Truth has had to recently withdraw some of its accusations about the Pentagon FDR after miscalculations were made, so I'm not 100% sure where the debate stands at this time, in that I'm not sure what the truth movement are claiming about it.
|
That is nothing to do with the FDR, just something they put up about the topography.
| Alex_V wrote: | | The claims I would make are that the FDRs are from the crashed planes, and as such confirm that they did crash, and that as it stands there is no direct evidence that they are either false, or contain data that directly supports any different flightpaths. |
Well it does show the plane still in the air when the data ends - which is unusual for a plane that crashes. But I sense you're easily satisfied. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Alex_V
Wrecker
Joined: 24 Sep 2007
Posts: 515
Location: London, England
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2008 11:42 am Post subject: Re: The Year in Review |
|
|
| KP50 wrote: | | Who knows whether the data provided came from an FDR found at the Pentagon. |
If only objects could testify where they have been. Then we could be extra certain. I can only repeat what has been said before - how absurd to question the flightpath provided by an FDR which you do not even believe is genuine in the first place! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KP50
Validated Poster
Joined: 23 Feb 2007
Posts: 526
Location: NZ
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2008 10:57 pm Post subject: Re: The Year in Review |
|
|
| Alex_V wrote: | | KP50 wrote: | | Who knows whether the data provided came from an FDR found at the Pentagon. |
If only objects could testify where they have been. Then we could be extra certain. I can only repeat what has been said before - how absurd to question the flightpath provided by an FDR which you do not even believe is genuine in the first place! |
If the FDR data does not match the supposed flightpath, then why would you not question that it is genuine? Are you saying it could show a flightpath from Oslo to Beijing and we should still not question it? Now that would be absurd wouldn't it?
Maybe the NTSB should help to clear up this matter ...... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
johndoex
Minor Poster
Joined: 17 Aug 2006
Posts: 87
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 10:33 am Post subject: Re: The Year in Review |
|
|
| Alex_V wrote: |
Well an FDR was found in the wreckage at the Pentagon - that gives you a very big clue that it should back up the OT to at least some extent. How an FDR found in the wreckage of the Pentagon should back up any theory that the flight never crashed at the Pentagon is beyond me. |
FDR Location and Recovery articles...
Can The Govt Get Their Story Straight? - Location Of Flight Data Recorder
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/FDR_location_091607.html
Lies, Conflicting Reports, Cover-Up's - Location of FDR Part II
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/location_2.html
| Quote: | | From what I have read about FDR data in general, and the interpretation of it, I would be very wary of making any grand claims that FDRs DEFINITELY corroborate the OT. Just as I would that they definitely do not. As I understand it there are a huge number of different variables recorded, and the interpretation of such data is more of a subjective art than you might expect. |
Interpreting Altitude, vertical speed, airspeed, and other parameters are as easy as 2+2=4 for anyone with a Private pilot certificate or better or those who take a small amount of time to study. This is why most "Duh-bunkers" do not even dispute the interpretation. Instead they try to make excuses that the FDR is missing seconds of data, in which we use their own excuses against them here...
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index.php?showtopic=7163
"Interpretation" may explain why these lists keep groing at a steady pace.
http://pilotsfor911truth.org
http://patriotsquestion911.com/pilots
| Quote: | | Also, as I understand it, Pilots For Truth has had to recently withdraw some of its accusations about the Pentagon FDR after miscalculations were made, |
Article in which we admitted error and is under review (its about topography, not the FDR)
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/descent_rate031308.html
"Duh-bunkers" keep their reputation of not being very observant.
Regards,
Rob
_________________
www.pilotsfor911truth.org
www.pilotsfor911truth.org/forum |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
johndoex
Minor Poster
Joined: 17 Aug 2006
Posts: 87
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 10:37 am Post subject: Re: The Year in Review |
|
|
| Alex_V wrote: |
how absurd to question the flightpath provided by an FDR which you do not even believe is genuine in the first place! |
The NTSB claims it is genuine. The data they claim is genuine does not support the govt story. They refuse to correct, comment, retract or offer side letters of explanation.
This doesnt seem to concern "Duh-Bunkers" too much, instead they make excuses for it.
Fortunately, there are many people who are highly concerned. The lists keep growing.
http://pilotsfor911truth.org
http://patriotsquestion911.com/pilots
_________________
www.pilotsfor911truth.org
www.pilotsfor911truth.org/forum |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
A Sharp Major
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 19 Feb 2006
Posts: 237
Location: In the van with the blacked out windows, parked outside your home.
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 12:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Getting back to the subject, 'The Year in Review' is looks as if I missed one shift. Nico Haupt's medication seems to have worn off (see the thread outside the township) and he is going (more) nuts. Off to the funny farm with you my boy.
I see that despite former professor Jones admitting that WTC 7 took a lot longer than previously 'truthed' to collapse, the old line is still 'truther' fodder.
The membership numbers of this site are impressive. Leaving out critics and multiple ID truthers, actual participation (posts) tell a different story. Truther icons are dropping like WTC 7. The 'truth' movement is wired for an uncontrolled demolition, self inflicted.
_________________
"It's been my policy to view the Internet not as an 'information highway,' but as an electronic asylum filled with babbling loonies.” Mike Royko
http://www.screwloosechange.blogspot.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pepik
Banned
Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 591
Location: The Square Mile
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 12:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yes I think I saw a squib when witnesses who saw a plane hit the pentagon were used to prove that the plane didn't hit the pentagon.
_________________
"could it be that ww2 and the extermination of jewish people was planned as a way of creating a race of people who it would be difficult to blame for anything, a cover race for the illuminati?" - a quote NOT from the 'controversial theories' section. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Alex_V
Wrecker
Joined: 24 Sep 2007
Posts: 515
Location: London, England
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 12:54 pm Post subject: Re: The Year in Review |
|
|
As usual conflicting reports equal cover-ups in the eyes of conspiracy theorists. Obviously the FDR is SO fake the perps decided to fake its discovery TWICE! Do conflicting reports of how the FDR was found make the FDR more likely to be a fake?
| Quote: | Interpreting Altitude, vertical speed, airspeed, and other parameters are as easy as 2+2=4 for anyone with a Private pilot certificate or better or those who take a small amount of time to study. This is why most "Duh-bunkers" do not even dispute the interpretation. Instead they try to make excuses that the FDR is missing seconds of data, in which we use their own excuses against them here...
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index.php?showtopic=7163 |
From what I have read around this topic, you are grossly oversimplifying the interpretation of data (and have a rep for doing so). I don't agree that debunkers do not dispute your interpretation, and I think you know you are being mischevous there. The argument about the actual time at which the FDR stops recording data is one of a number levelled against the PilotsForTruth analysis.
What should be noted is that there is a debate here. Pilots for Truth are arguing a case that many critics believe was debunked over a year ago - I wish I was in a better position to judge the various sides of the debate, but to suggest that the argument is won and that PilotsForTruth DEFINITELY prove the FDR is a fake is wishful thinking.
That said, I would like the debunking community (if there is such a thing) to sort out their arguments about the FDR in a much more organised way - trying to read up on this topic is very complicated, and that plays into PfT's hands on this subject.
The list of pilots who disagree may dwarf your list - unfortunately they don't keep score.
Fair comment - I should have checked it up first. PilotsForTruth have admitted incompetence in an area not directly connected with the FDR. Another 'smoking gun' theory bites the dust, but I'm sure you'll come up with another one in no time at all. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 1:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| A Sharp Major wrote: | | I see that despite former professor Jones admitting that WTC 7 took a lot longer than previously 'truthed' to collapse, the old line is still 'truther' fodder. |
It certainly - and justifiably - still is. A roofline-to-ground symmetrical collapse in 6.5 seconds with debris falling within the building's footprint plus 70ft, is a remarkable achievement to this day for a building of that height.
As with WTC1, we deduce that the structural attack was a timed sequence of events taking place from around the time of the impacts (i.e. Rodriguez (and others) reported explosions in the sub-basements immediately prior to the aircraft impact), so the penthouse collapse as the penultimate episode of the neatly executed demolition of WTC7 shouldn't come as any great surprise.
Except to critics.
_________________
Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
It's them or us. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Alex_V
Wrecker
Joined: 24 Sep 2007
Posts: 515
Location: London, England
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KP50
Validated Poster
Joined: 23 Feb 2007
Posts: 526
Location: NZ
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 12:05 am Post subject: Re: The Year in Review |
|
|
| Alex_V wrote: |
As usual conflicting reports equal cover-ups in the eyes of conspiracy theorists. Obviously the FDR is SO fake the perps decided to fake its discovery TWICE! Do conflicting reports of how the FDR was found make the FDR more likely to be a fake?
| Quote: | Interpreting Altitude, vertical speed, airspeed, and other parameters are as easy as 2+2=4 for anyone with a Private pilot certificate or better or those who take a small amount of time to study. This is why most "Duh-bunkers" do not even dispute the interpretation. Instead they try to make excuses that the FDR is missing seconds of data, in which we use their own excuses against them here...
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index.php?showtopic=7163 |
From what I have read around this topic, you are grossly oversimplifying the interpretation of data (and have a rep for doing so). I don't agree that debunkers do not dispute your interpretation, and I think you know you are being mischevous there. The argument about the actual time at which the FDR stops recording data is one of a number levelled against the PilotsForTruth analysis.
What should be noted is that there is a debate here. Pilots for Truth are arguing a case that many critics believe was debunked over a year ago - I wish I was in a better position to judge the various sides of the debate, but to suggest that the argument is won and that PilotsForTruth DEFINITELY prove the FDR is a fake is wishful thinking.
That said, I would like the debunking community (if there is such a thing) to sort out their arguments about the FDR in a much more organised way - trying to read up on this topic is very complicated, and that plays into PfT's hands on this subject.
The list of pilots who disagree may dwarf your list - unfortunately they don't keep score.
Fair comment - I should have checked it up first. PilotsForTruth have admitted incompetence in an area not directly connected with the FDR. Another 'smoking gun' theory bites the dust, but I'm sure you'll come up with another one in no time at all. |
Alex, your mind is very closed isn't it? Everything you have typed here indicates that
1. You don't really know anything about FDRs (that's fine, nor do I).
2. You have already decided that Pilots for Truth are wrong - even though you know nothing about the subject. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Alex_V
Wrecker
Joined: 24 Sep 2007
Posts: 515
Location: London, England
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 12:42 am Post subject: Re: The Year in Review |
|
|
| KP50 wrote: | Alex, your mind is very closed isn't it? Everything you have typed here indicates that
1. You don't really know anything about FDRs (that's fine, nor do I).
2. You have already decided that Pilots for Truth are wrong - even though you know nothing about the subject. |
Not the biggest surprise in the World, surely? Like any sane person I know beyond any reasonable doubt that the plane hit the pentagon - why the hell would I entertain PfT's debunked notions about how it was impossible? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
A Sharp Major
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 19 Feb 2006
Posts: 237
Location: In the van with the blacked out windows, parked outside your home.
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 12:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Chek, in respect of WTC 7 former professor Jones says 'we' (the Truth Movement) 'blew it'. Sounds as if Jones is taking responsiblity for its demolition. What a turn up for the books, what with the truthiness movement blaming Silverstein for 'pulling it'.
Semantics aside, have you got your evidence together yet, what should have happened, or not, to Building 7? Do you have a theory, with calculations and drawings ready to present at one of NIST's public fora or are you and the truthiness movement just going to continue ranting at the internet from the basement. Don't place any faith in Gage doing it for you.
_________________
"It's been my policy to view the Internet not as an 'information highway,' but as an electronic asylum filled with babbling loonies.” Mike Royko
http://www.screwloosechange.blogspot.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 9:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| A Sharp Major wrote: | | Chek, in respect of WTC 7 former professor Jones says 'we' (the Truth Movement) 'blew it'. Sounds as if Jones is taking responsiblity for its demolition. What a turn up for the books, what with the truthiness movement blaming Silverstein for 'pulling it'. |
The word 'context' might be relevant here, and the phrase 'sounds as if' is a bit weak even for a critic's offhand assertion, so I'll just leave that to fester, unless you can firm it up a bit more (ooer missus etc).
| A Sharp Major wrote: | | Semantics aside, have you got your evidence together yet, what should have happened, or not, to Building 7? Do you have a theory, with calculations and drawings ready to present at one of NIST's public fora or are you and the truthiness movement just going to continue ranting at the internet from the basement. |
Not personally, no. But then, neither have the NIST continuity cover-up team, despite access to the finest brains and a trough of cash you could drown an elephant in, for nearly seven years now.
But as was once said by someone wiser than I - and apparently you too -"You dont need a weather man to know which way the wind blows".
Or tell you when a 47 storey skyscraper is being neatly, and thus deliberately, demolished. Maybe it was because the vandals took the handles?
As Anthony Lawson eloquently put it, 'this is an orange'; no matter how stenuously it might be argued by some that it's really, after further study, an apple.
| A Sharp Major wrote: | | Don't place any faith in Gage doing it for you. |
Gage may or may not be what he appears, but what he signifies is an increasing educated and 'respectable' demographic who are not only merely unconvinced with the approved narrative of what happened in September 2001, but also determined to expose the real reasons underlying the many and manifold falsehoods.
Sneer all you like, but a critical mass moment will come.
_________________
Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
It's them or us. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KP50
Validated Poster
Joined: 23 Feb 2007
Posts: 526
Location: NZ
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 29, 2008 3:14 am Post subject: Re: The Year in Review |
|
|
| Alex_V wrote: | | KP50 wrote: | Alex, your mind is very closed isn't it? Everything you have typed here indicates that
1. You don't really know anything about FDRs (that's fine, nor do I).
2. You have already decided that Pilots for Truth are wrong - even though you know nothing about the subject. |
Not the biggest surprise in the World, surely? Like any sane person I know beyond any reasonable doubt that the plane hit the pentagon - why the hell would I entertain PfT's debunked notions about how it was impossible? |
Ah yes the claimed debunking - that you can't find on the internet - but you are sure you've seen it. So you are saying that the FDR exactly matches the observed damage? How did you come by this knowledge? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Alex_V
Wrecker
Joined: 24 Sep 2007
Posts: 515
Location: London, England
|
| Posted: Thu May 01, 2008 12:24 pm Post subject: Re: The Year in Review |
|
|
| KP50 wrote: | | Ah yes the claimed debunking - that you can't find on the internet - but you are sure you've seen it. |
??? What are you talking about?
| Quote: | | So you are saying that the FDR exactly matches the observed damage? |
Where did I ever say that?
What, in clear English, are YOU saying about the FDR? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wibble
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 03 May 2008
Posts: 162
Location: Wibble
|
| Posted: Sun May 04, 2008 12:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | As with WTC1, we deduce that the structural attack was a timed sequence of events taking place from around the time of the impacts (i.e. Rodriguez (and others) reported explosions in the sub-basements immediately prior to the aircraft impact), so the penthouse collapse as the penultimate episode of the neatly executed demolition of WTC7 shouldn't come as any great surprise. |
Already debunked:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6243624912447824934&q=screw+9 11+mysteries&total=25&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0
People heard explosions as the Titanic sunk, was that CD to?
Last edited by Wibble on Sun May 04, 2008 10:53 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
A Sharp Major
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 19 Feb 2006
Posts: 237
Location: In the van with the blacked out windows, parked outside your home.
|
| Posted: Sun May 04, 2008 8:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
Wibble, you have put words into my mouth in your last 'quotation'. I said no such thing, nor would I. Please amend your post accordingly. Thank you.
_________________
"It's been my policy to view the Internet not as an 'information highway,' but as an electronic asylum filled with babbling loonies.” Mike Royko
http://www.screwloosechange.blogspot.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wibble
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 03 May 2008
Posts: 162
Location: Wibble
|
| Posted: Sun May 04, 2008 10:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| A Sharp Major wrote: | | Wibble, you have put words into my mouth in your last 'quotation'. I said no such thing, nor would I. Please amend your post accordingly. Thank you. |
Sorry old chap, I have changed it now. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
| Posted: Mon May 05, 2008 10:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Wibble, if you're entirely satisfied by Pat Screwlucy's joke "debunking" site, then why continue here?
| Wibble wrote: | | People heard explosions as the Titanic sunk, was that CD to? |
If they'd also heard explosions before the iceberg's impact, then it obviously could well have been suspicious.
_________________
Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
It's them or us. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wibble
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 03 May 2008
Posts: 162
Location: Wibble
|
| Posted: Mon May 05, 2008 10:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| chek wrote: |
Wibble, if you're entirely satisfied by Pat Screwlucy's joke "debunking" site, then why continue here?
| Wibble wrote: | | People heard explosions as the Titanic sunk, was that CD to? |
If they'd also heard explosions before the iceberg's impact, then it obviously could well have been suspicious. |
So that site is a joke, but Loose Change etc are serious? DEBUNKED!!!!!
Please show me proof of explosions before the aircraft hit? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
| Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 12:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Wibble wrote: | So that site is a joke, but Loose Change etc are serious?
DEBUNKED!!!!! |
Regrettably for you, even multiple exclamation marks and multiple minor errors in the earlier versions of LC don't make it so.
| Wibble wrote: | | Please show me proof of explosions before the aircraft hit? |
Proof is a mobile concept, depending on that to which the term is being applied.
The absolute truth or falsehood mathematical concept of proof being quite different to say, the legal one. In the legal sense, proof is a judgement arrived at by weight of evidence.
Such as the evidence from the multiple sources detailed in the link below:
http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=187 45
_________________
Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
It's them or us. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wibble
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 03 May 2008
Posts: 162
Location: Wibble
|
| Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 11:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| No, I said proof!!! Show us proof!!!!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
