The Smoking Gun - Sept. 11th Plane Impact Times - moved-CC

[Pikey]

Thanx Scar, that picture of a man burying his head in the sand reference to JP........fabulous I've just stopped laughing.

Another Shill/Troll IMHO!

Thanx for the entertainment though JP. I'm out of here. I wont be wasting anymore energy on you JP. But no doubt another CTS, Jayref, Johnny Pixel will appear here.

Remember "The Gremlins" and how the bad ones multiplied! Careful with that water folks!

[Johnny Pixels]

[Johnny Pixels]

Just to clarify, as discussed in the critics corner, the seismic data lacks the resolution to determine the times accurately, and this is admitted by the seismologists in question. There is therefore, no conflict between impact times.

I fully expect this post to be deleted, or moved to the critics corner so that this piece of "evidence" can continue to be stated as fact.

[scar]

Yeah thats an excellent documentary as well quicknthedead.
Why not watch em both then 'debunk' them JP?

And btw, you didnt debunk this thread, or any thread since you arrived.

[Johnny Pixels]

[quicknthedead]

[Johnny Pixels]

[scar]

Your assertion was false. You referred to the pentagon data.
Go back to 911 myths and try again, theres a good lad.

[Andrew Johnson]

[Andrew Johnson]

 

Dear All,

 

Following some thought and reflection I have now unlocked the locked threads. I have the following ideas for all posters to consider:

 

1)      If people want to waste their time posting pointless replies to someone who isn’t interested in the truth – merely in stating that “he/she/it is the only person who knows what it is” and that we are the opposite of what we know we are – they are free to do just that.

2)      Johnny Pixels is either a software entity or person who is paid to do what he does.

3)      His strategy of wasting our time has been quite successful.

4)      It is possible the JP is working in tandem with someone else who is apparently “on our side”. This is simple technique will fuel the time wasting process and be much more effective at sucking genuine people into the fake debate.

 

So, can we learn any lessons from this? Yes! As one of my good friends put it “DON’T FEED THE TROLLS!”

I will try to keep moving posts of people of Johnny’s ilk to the critics corner, but this could take time as whomever is doing it may intensify their efforts to derail our campaign, so I’m not going to attempt to fight it that much – there is too much else to be done.

 

To JP, and their type, what you have done has certainly not been a complete waste of my own time. In my effort to determine whether you are a machine or not, I decided to contact someone I haven’t spoken to for over 14 years and I used the e-mail below to advise him of the current “state of play” with our campaign. He is a professor now. So hopefully he will learn the truth too.

 

Whoever or whatever you are, it is your efforts that will ultimately fail – because of those genuine people who post against you – collectively we stand against you and your agenda.

I will do my best not to be drawn in to any debates on “critics corner” for all the reasons outlined above. I will post this message to threads where JP has posted.

 

Thank you.

---

Dear Dave,

 

I wonder if you remember me. The last time I spoke to you was probably over 14 years ago when we both worked above the Canteen at Technology Drive, Beeston, for the (now dismembered) GPT. I used to work with Nick Thompson and Dave Mason for Dave Wright's (redundant) squad - at the same time you worked for Douggie Laws.

 

Sorry to "interrupt" your busy schedule. Don't feel the need to reply to this message. I will get to why I thought of you later on. I would warn you that, if you want to try and answer this question honestly, it may turn your world upside down (no, it's not religious - it is, essentially, a technical question).

 

I was just browsing your cv - man, what a cv! I'm a bit flummoxed by it actually, and rather ambivalent about asking you what I wanted to ask you, because it's kind of trivial, but behind the question is an issue of global importance.

 

 

Like many people, I experienced "The Broadband Revolution" - in about May 2003 (when it became available in our area on NTL). Since then, well, let's say I have had "a 30+ hours per week unpaid research job". To cut a long story short, this has lead me to join, following invitation, a loose association of Scholars called "Scholar's for 9/11 Truth". This group formed in about December last year and it's most prominent member is probably Professor (Emeritus) Morgan Reynolds, who served in George W Bush's 1st Administration for 16 months in the Department of Labour . You can find out about other members of the group on the web link, and also here are audios (done by other people) of several of them being interviewed etc (stored on my own website).

 

http://www.checktheevidence.com/audio/index.php?dir=911/

 

I have also become involved in The British 9/11 Truth Campaign, with "these hats on", I have corresponded with people like Michael Meacher and BBC News Director Helen Boaden. Some of this correspondence (and other stuff) can be found on the Campaign Forum Website (link).

 

This brings me to my question, which, from your considerable knowledge and experience, you may be able to give me some thoughts on - or ask someone you might know for theirs, as it may be a little outside your field. I have no idea why your name suddenly came into my mind, except that I remember you as a jolly, affable and extremely intelligent person (honest!)

 

 

QUESTION:

 

In the past couple of months, we have experienced increasing "attacks" on our forum, and I wondered if you thought it would be feasible that a "forum posting Bot" exists somewhere in the world.

 

My reason for asking has been brought on by a sequence of posts I have made on this thread.

 

http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=2974&postdays=0&post order=asc&start=0

 

Scan through my posts which respond to "Johnny Pixels". Is Johnny Pixels a real person, or is he, perhaps what I suggest (jokingly) he might be (on the thread)? I wonder if something could pass the Turing test. Looking at the latest competition, http://loebner.net/Prizef/2005_Contest/Transcripts.html it would seem not. However, on our forum, the topics are fairly narrow and you don't post questions in a random or "gobbledegook" fashion. Also, the communication is not real time. Added to that, the "black technology" is at least 30 to 40 years in advance of anything publicly disclosed, so my current guess would be around 80% probability that "Johnny Pixels" and his ilk are software entities. Do you know any AI experts, or linguists or psychologists who would profile the thread?

 

In reality, the answer to this particular question is perhaps not that important, if you care to consider the information posted on the forum and, why the forum even exists in the 1st place. (My answers below).

 

For myself, I can say for sure that the scenario portrayed in Orwell's 1984 (Orwell's real name was Eric Blair, don't you know) is pretty much what we are very near to now - and I am now personally engaged in a vigorous information war, and a battle for our freedom.The US and UK are either supporting Israel or being lead by them in planned genocide in the Middle East. I wish I could convince myself otherwise. BBC News has now become a propaganda organisation where, for regular news bulletins, no one is willing to do real investigative journalism and ask any hard questions of those that should be questioned. This is proved by the BBC's point blank refusal to cover the formation of our highly-credentialed Scholars Group (see our forum for proof). They fake impartiality. The ignore or distort important stories, but are happy to report inconsequential trivialities as part of "editorial policy" - and we pay for it. The proof of this is in the fact that you know nothing about the Worldwide 9/11 Truth campaign (if it is true that you currently know nothing about it).

 

I am sorry if this has spoiled your day. Take a look at the Scholars group and see what you make of it. More info and free DVDs available on request. Other comments and feedback greatly welcomed. I hope you'll come and join the party. We need all the "rockers" we can get.

 

Cheers for reading this, dude - from way back, to right now....

Andrew (Johnson)

Still the same really, if you remember me....

 

P.S. This is about as far as I've pushed out my boat on this issue so far.

[/html]

[DeFecToR]

Er. I'm all for defending the guys 'on my side' as it were but accusing our detractors of actually being government controlled AI super-software is a little off the shelf. Assume for one second that he is NOT such an entity but IS in fact a real person, imagine how utterly bizzare and hilarious this acusation is.
If there were some reason AT ALL to assume he might not be real (man that sounds wierd) then please state it. Accusing him of being a robot ( ) because of his "gobbledygook" really does make us all out to be the most paranoid truly tinfoil-hat wearing bunch of nutters ever.
Im certainly not saying that such software does not exist, i'm sure it does, but without any kind of evidence to back it up, those claims are really beyond the pail.
Imagine how this appears to someone reading this site for the first time.
I do not agree with JP or JR on the issue of 911 but i certainly believe they are real. Those 911 debunk sites could be very convincing to someone who had visited them and nothing else (as these people appear to have done), so one must assume that there are those who agree with what they say.
Not everone is on our side. People WILL agree with the official story, and bitterly defend it. Please, lets not demean ourselves by accusing those people of not being human.

[Johnny Pixels]

[DeFecToR]

[Johnny Pixels]

Ok, I realise some people here don't like my explanation of the lack of time discrepancies, and claim the LDEO data and analysis is 100% correct, right? They also say the spikes show explosives, right?

And the LDEO anaylsis is correct, right?

The LDEO seismologists state categorically that the spikes show that there were no explosives involved. And you guys trust the LDEO data, so that shows no explosives were used.

Secondly, this photo shows one of the plane impacts, but this didn't cause a spike on the readings, or there would also be another spike to represent this event:


So that means this explosion was too small to register above the background noise, so how big was the explosion that did register? Why wasn't it felt by the firefighters who were carrying out the manhole inspection? There is no record of them on the video making a comment about a massive explosion, other than the impact of the aircraft. This massive explosion should've occured 12 seconds before the impact, but none of the firefighters mention it.

Or look at this video:

http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-235300116118000688&q=wtc+bo om

There is about a 5 second delay between the impact and the boom, speed of sound approx 330m/s, so that puts the distance at about 1600m away from the tower. Except that 17 second before that, there is no sound that matches up with this alledged explosion that must be bigger than the one shown, because this fuel explosion does not allegedly show up on the seismic reading, so this other explosion must be bigger to show up.

And it's not there.

[Andrew Johnson]

Reply from my friend:
=
---------------------------
I read the thread you referred to, and I'm 90% certain that JP isn't a robot. The levels of cognitive function and argument construction are just too high for the state of the art. I _could_ ask some people for their opinion, but even if someone does have a tool thats way ahead of the publicly recognized SOtA I'll still only get a negative answer, which isn't going to be too useful since it won't prove anything at all! Quite frankly, it'd be cheaper to employ flesh and blood rather than silicon and electrons to do this job anyway. Si might have been used to _identify_ the thread, but meat is used to address it.


On a vaguely related subject; I do think that the issues that JP raises do need to be refuted head on. The way in which any scientific theory eventually becomes accepted as fact is through a process of work-hardening and self questioning...that means that the JPs need to be given a platform and actively deconstructed, because that's how you'll find holes and logical inconsistencies in your own belief system. That's not to say you're right or wrong, it's just good process. Be careful about pushing them off into a 'critics corner', where they don't get equal standing, because that's implicit censorship of points of view that don't agree with your own.


Think about it - if you only ever mingle and lock horns with people who share your own belief set then you're likely to develop a positive feedback loop, and that leads to instability.. you _need_ those negative opinions to keep you based in reality...it isn't wasted cycles, it's essential...JP is doing you a favor in helping you ask the hard questions, or at least helping you check that you're got answers to those questions. Even if JP believed your theory 100%, it would still be perfectly reasonable for him to take this position in order to test the thesis... don't shout him down, argue him down...if you can't (and you need to clinically and cynically evaluate your responses to see if you have) then go back and look at those elements of your construction again, you'll be the better for it.


Entertaining to see the attempt at willy comparisons about who's got the better scientific background though - pleased to see folks didn't bite on that one
===

From his other responses he perhaps does not have an awareness about how far the Truth campaign has progressed, so I sent him some links. In any case, he is free to read JP and their ilk's posts as anyone else is.

It is worth also mentioning how the BBC and all the MSM have censored our "views" (I prefer to say "scientifically verifiable evidence")

[Johnny Pixels]

[Johnny Pixels]

[Johnny Pixels]

Bump. You can't complain that I'm here for disruption and then fail to answer any questions I ask.

So how about it. Where was the explosion that was bigger than the one pictured above, and yet made no noise, and no witnesses heard or felt anything?

[Johnny Pixels]

Bumpity bump!

Please, someone explain?

[Jay Ref]

[Johnny Pixels]

[TK0001]

I only registered to inform you that Johnny Pixels absolutely destroyed each and every CTer in this thread. You should really be ashamed.

Oh, and beep beep boop beep.

[Graham]

Sorry TK0001, don't see any clear "victor" in this thread.

Which is exactly why a proper investigation with all considered evidence is needed.

[DeFecToR]

I'll have a go.

The impact of the planes didnt register because the mass of the buildings absorbed the energy of the impacts.

The explosion that did register did so because it was underground and as such the energy of the blast would have more easily travelled through the earth.

Also, it seems a bit of a coincidence that there were multiple witnesses who reported a large explosion just before the plane impacted. This data certainly seems to back up these accounts.

As for why there was no sound of the explosion on the video, why would there be? It was underground. A dull thud (what an underground explosion would have sounded like from above ground as only low frequencies of sound would have been audible) would be much less likely to be picked up.

And please, dont try and claim that no witnesses heard this explosion. You know that is a lie.

And as a side note;
What do you OCTers think of this footage;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7BnTaWMyoc

Dont worry JP, its only 18 seconds long. I'm sure you can find the time in your obviously busy schedule to watch it.

Just in case you dont, its of MULTIPLE smoke ejections on MANY FLOORS of the north tower just before the impact of the second plane.

Cant wait to hear this....

[DeFecToR]

IVE GOT IT!!!!!

Localised tornados. Caused by aggressive sun spot activity in conjunction with light refraction on the camera lense.

No?

Er.

Desk fans?

A WILLOW THE WISP!!!!

Maybe there WAS a pod on the incoming plane. Except it was a BIIIG lawn blower set to suck.

[TK0001]

[TK0001]

Defector, do you believe that a certain amount of ignited jet fuel traveled down certain elevator shafts? If so, do you think that could've explained the explosions in the basement, and the fact that Rodriguez saw a man emerge from the elevator with his skin burned off?

[DeFecToR]

[Johnny Pixels]

[DeFecToR]