sincere (non hating) discussion desired

88 replies [Last post]
BlindToTruth's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-08-12

longtime lurker.  great site.
i just found this and it is very discouraging, i don't quite know what to make of it though.  i'm sure sceptics will be hollering from the bleachers but give it a thorough view when you have the time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zUht6cLkMc
Second part of the series:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-guQaYgrWqI&mode=related& amp;search=
please check out the part about 20 minutes in if you can't watch the whole thing......i'd really like some comments or insight from anyone present during the event.

BlindToTruth's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-08-12

20 minutes in on part 2 to clarify.  thanks for any comments (from those who have viewed most of the material please).

opie's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-06-15

I'm not a conspiracy kinda guy myself, so this isn't going to typically appeal to me.  But if I was, I would get away from making open inferences and stick to the facts to make my case, of which there isn't much here.
It's interesting to me that the people that continually blame the US government for incompetance (and many times rightly so), are the same people that suggest that the government has the capability and wherewithal to successully carry out conspiracies to fool billions.

dude's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-11-15

Interesting video.  I think the idea of the government causing 911 is hogwash though (although I'm not opposed to the idea of Bush being involved, being a Bush hater and all , hahahahaha) .  They certainly were incompetent though.  Who caused 911 is still open in my mind......I thought the part where they tracked down (was it 10 of them?) the 'alleged' hijackers of the planes and demonstrated that they were still alive and well in their respective countries was pretty interesting though.  How could they still be alive if they died in the plane crashes?
That in addition to the laughable explanation that the WTC towers and that other building  were brought down due to fires.  These would be the ONLY buildings in history to be brought down from fires, especially ones that couldn't have been even close to hot enough to melt the structural steel. 
Thanks for the post.  It's nice to have a fellow "conspiracy theorist" around .  I still don't think that the government was involved per se.

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

9/11: Debunking the Myths (Popular Mechanics)

opie's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-06-15

Mike, how dare you let facts get in the way of a "good" conspiracy?

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

opie wrote:
mikebutler222 wrote:http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html ?page=1
Mike, how dare you let facts get in the way of a "good" conspiracy?

Sorry, but the "Loose Change" types don't deserve any respect. I'm doing the best I can just to be civil and post a few rebuttal sites.
http://www.lolloosechange.co.nr/
Check out the line by line rebuttal on the “Loose Change” film itself. Be sure not to miss the audiotape of the members (“Deniers Speak”) of this movement on various radio programs.
http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=911_morons
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2070972464271621938
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6uFNBpjZCI4&eurl=
http://911conspiracysmasher.blogspot.com/
http://www.mikejwilson.com/911/
 

dude's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-11-15

MikeB:
Did you see the part where they demonstrated that a majority of the alleged hijackers are still alive?  Although this is NOT evidence of a conspiracy; if true, it is certainly indicitve of severe incompetence.  Also the pentagon "missile" was certainly not a Boeing 757, my father in law was a Boeing inspector for many years and he was able to point out immediately that the 'recovered' engines and other assorted wreckage was absolutely NOT a Boeing 757.  Fox put out a good show (I think it is also on YouTube?) on the GLARING inconcistencies of the Pentagon attack.  Like I said I don't think it's the government, the verdict is still out IMHO.  There also is a really good video that slows down the 'video' of the airplane strike and zooms in on the first couple frames and the picture is clearly a missile not a 757 nose.  Damage consistent with a missile, picture of a missile nose on the video, plus all other video that was available is 'locked away'.  Sounds just a little fishy to me.
What would you expect from a conspiracy theorist though?
Touche big boy.
Grrrrrrrrrrowwwwlllll.

NASD Newbie's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-08-01

Where are the people who were in the plane that hit the Pentagon if they didn't die there?
Where is the plane that is thought to have hit the Pentagon if it didn't actually hit there?
Where was a missile of that size fired from?

dude's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-11-15

mikebutler222 wrote:opie wrote:
mikebutler222 wrote:http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html ?page=1
Mike, how dare you let facts get in the way of a "good" conspiracy?

Sorry, but the "Loose Change" types don't deserve any respect. I'm doing the best I can just to be civil and post a few rebuttal sites.
http://www.lolloosechange.co.nr/
Check out the line by line rebuttal on the “Loose Change” film itself. Be sure not to miss the audiotape of the members (“Deniers Speak”) of this movement on various radio programs.
http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=911_morons
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2070972464271621938
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6uFNBpjZCI4&eurl=
http://911conspiracysmasher.blogspot.com/
http://www.mikejwilson.com/911/
 

Definitely some good links there Mike, thanks.  There are still many many discrepancies that are not addressed though. 

dude's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-11-15

NASD Newbie wrote:
Where are the people who were in the plane that hit the Pentagon if they didn't die there?
Where is the plane that is thought to have hit the Pentagon if it didn't actually hit there?
Where was a missile of that size fired from?

Those questions don't have to be answered to demonstrate that the wreckage was not consistent with a Boeing 757 and that the video clearly shows a missile head (long and narrow) not a 757 nose (tall and wide). 

NASD Newbie's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-08-01

Don't have to be answered?  Of course they do, the video was distorted by the fisheye lens that was used.
Only mental midgets would think anything else.

dude's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-11-15

check these photos out boys:
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.cosmicpeng uin.com/911/pentagon/images/simulation1.jpg&imgrefurl=ht tp://www.cosmicpenguin.com/911/pentagon/ImageIndexPentagon.h tml&h=322&w=500&sz=19&hl=en&start=4& tbnid=1ne4xGHRGPAUkM:&tbnh=84&tbnw=130&prev=/ima ges%3Fq%3D911%2Bpentagon%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D

dude's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-11-15

Oh and I forgot you guys are saying that this damage:

.....is caused by a Jumbo 757? 

NASD Newbie's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-08-01

Nah, a 757 is not a "Jumbo."  It's a single aisle airplane.

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

dude wrote:MikeB:
Did you see the part where they demonstrated that a majority of the alleged hijackers are still alive?  Although this is NOT evidence of a conspiracy; if true, it is certainly indicitve of severe incompetence.  Also the pentagon "missile" was certainly not a Boeing 757, my father in law was a Boeing inspector for many years and he was able to point out immediately that the 'recovered' engines and other assorted wreckage was absolutely NOT a Boeing 757.  Fox put out a good show (I think it is also on YouTube?) on the GLARING inconcistencies of the Pentagon attack.  Like I said I don't think it's the government, the verdict is still out IMHO.  There also is a really good video that slows down the 'video' of the airplane strike and zooms in on the first couple frames and the picture is clearly a missile not a 757 nose.  Damage consistent with a missile, picture of a missile nose on the video, plus all other video that was available is 'locked away'.  Sounds just a little fishy to me.
What would you expect from a conspiracy theorist though?
Touche big boy.
Grrrrrrrrrrowwwwlllll. How exactly did they 'prove' that a majority of the hijackers are alive?  Saying that they are alive and highlighting their picture is hardly proof.  Especially given that so many folks of Arab nationalities have the exact same name.

dude's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-11-15

Note I said IF true.  Just interesting.  For me the Pentagon attack is the real deal though.

NASD Newbie's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-08-01

You're saying the Pentagon was attacked--as if the rest of us doubt it?

dude's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-11-15

I also did not use the word "prove" Joe.......please don't twist my words, I think the loose change video has a lot of pure B.S. in addition to some good info.....mostly B.S. though. 
NASDy:  I guess the 'jumbo' reference was to clarify that the 'official' impact hole looks like a much smaller plane (if it was a plane) and a 757 is quite a large plane .  Sorry, I am certainly nieve on aircraft.

dude's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-11-15

NASDy:
To clarify, the idea that the attack on the Pentagon was a 757 seems to be B.S.
 

NASD Newbie's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-08-01

The 757 is actually quite narrow. a naive person might think it was a missile.

hubbabubba's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-08-03

newbie, did you get my book recommendation from the medallion thread?

NASD Newbie's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-08-01

hubbabubba wrote:newbie, did you get my book recommendation from the medallion thread?
I knew Dr. Black a little from his days at Goldman--he was brought over to our shop by our resident brains to talk about the formula.
It got me into more trouble than it solved because it doesn't take rumors and other forms of inside information into its calculations.

hubbabubba's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-08-03

Certainly the formula has its limitations as does any arbitrage/quant strategy.  Its still an interesting read though b/c it brings to life some of the dull theory.  Not as interesting as "When Genius Failed" though. 

dude's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-11-15

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://website.lineon e.net/~bosankoe/Video_h1_2x.jpg&imgrefurl=http://website .lineone.net/~bosankoe/analysis.htm&h=618&w=840& sz=77&hl=en&start=33&tbnid=bRh9V8RBduKh7M:&t bnh=107&tbnw=145&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dpentagon%2Bvideo %26start%3D20%26ndsp%3D20%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26s a%3DN
Good info too. 
 

opie's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-06-15

I hestitate to continue in this rather absurd discussion, but asking someone "does this look like a 757 hit this building" is rather silly given that NO ONE HAS SEEN THESE THINGS HAPPEN BEFORE.
By the way, as in all things, incentives matter.  Do you think the associates of these now vaporized (and likely virgin-less) gentlemen have more incentive to show "proof" that they are still alive?
Keep in mind the name Mohammad is the most common on the planet.

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

dude wrote:
MikeB:
Did you see the part where they demonstrated that a majority of the alleged hijackers are still alive? 
They claimed it, they didn't demonstrate it.
 
Although this is NOT evidence of a conspiracy; if true, it is certainly indicitve of severe incompetence. 
No, it would be proof that the entire mainstream media is in on it too as they would otherwise never, never let the "fact" that these guys are alive go unmentioned in every newspaper from now until doomsday.
 
Also the pentagon "missile" was certainly not a Boeing 757, my father in law was a Boeing inspector for many years and he was able to point out immediately that the 'recovered' engines and other assorted wreckage was absolutely NOT a Boeing 757. 
Please tell me you're kidding.... imagine how large the conspiracy to cover up THAT detail would have to be.
 
 Fox put out a good show (I think it is also on YouTube?) on the GLARING inconcistencies of the Pentagon attack. 
Link it to us. No doubt it can be dissected quickly.
 
 Like I said I don't think it's the government, the verdict is still out IMHO. 
Not to rational people it isn't.
There also is a really good video that slows down the 'video' of the airplane strike and zooms in on the first couple frames and the picture is clearly a missile not a 757 nose. 
Again, please tell me you're kidding...
 
Damage consistent with a missile, picture of a missile nose on the video, plus all other video that was available is 'locked away'.  Sounds just a little fishy to me.
Again, step back for just a sec from what you just said and imagine the massive conspiracy that has to be at work, even now, to cover up that detail. It defines reason.

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

dude wrote:
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://website.lineon e.net/~bosankoe/Video_h1_2x.jpg&imgrefurl=http://website .lineone.net/~bosankoe/analysis.htm&h=618&w=840& sz=77&hl=en&start=33&tbnid=bRh9V8RBduKh7M:&t bnh=107&tbnw=145&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dpentagon%2Bvideo %26start%3D20%26ndsp%3D20%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26s a%3DN
Good info too. 
 

No, dude, there's nothing there. Now "good info" would be this guy finding a way to prove that the bodies there were faked (to include their DNA) to cover the conspiracy. Seriously, this is pure moonbat stuff.

dude's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-11-15

How in the hell does anyone recover DNA from bodies that were scortched in an inferno like that one?

dude's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-11-15

note:  sounds fishy does not mean conclusive evidence to me.  I am still open that my skepticism is misplaced.

NASD Newbie's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-08-01

dude wrote:
How in the hell does anyone recover DNA from bodies that were scortched in an inferno like that one?

Unless the body is burned to ashes it is possible to recover DNA--I would think that you'd know that.

dude's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-11-15

I am also remembering the dozens of people interviewed at the pentagon site that were saying "it sounded like a missile" (yes I know others said it sounded like a plane as well).  Whatever.......being a moonbat isn't so bad....right?  Um maybe I'll have the doctors up my meds .

dude's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-11-15

My final link and then I'm done (this is in reponse to NASD's assertion that DNA was recovered etc....).  3/4 down on the page it shows some decent info.  Peace.
http://killtown.911review.org/flight77/inside.html

NASD Newbie's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-08-01

You're not a moonbat, you're a moron.
A plane took off, radar tracked it as it flew into the Pentagon, the plane never appeared anywhere else and none of the passengers phoned home.
A missile large enough to do that much damage would have to  have been fired from somewhere--where is that somewhere?
 

Philo Kvetch's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-05-17

NASD Newbie wrote:
You're not a moonbat, you're a moron.
A plane took off, radar tracked it as it flew into the Pentagon, the plane never appeared anywhere else and none of the passengers phoned home.
A missile large enough to do that much damage would have to  have been fired from somewhere--where is that somewhere?
 

From between your ears.  There's nothing there now, ya cute little dung beetle you!

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

dude wrote:
How in the hell does anyone recover DNA from bodies that were scortched in an inferno like that one?

It happens all the time, and you can be sure if it couldn't there would be people well versed in the field stepping forward to challenge the findings.

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

dude wrote:I am also remembering the dozens of people interviewed at the pentagon site that were saying "it sounded like a missile" (yes I know others said it sounded like a plane as well).  Whatever.......being a moonbat isn't so bad....right?  Um maybe I'll have the doctors up my meds .
 
If you've ever heard a jet (any jet, much less a large airliner) flying just feet off the deck, you'd know it does sound like a missile. It shouldn't be surprising that people who've never heard a jetliner flying just feet off the ground before would note that it sounds like another form of low flying, very fast device. Most of the noise comes (as it approaches you,) from aerodynamic forces in both cases.
You may be aware that it’s common for hurricane and tornado survivors to say “it sounded like a freight train”. That doesn’t mean it really was a train.

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

dude wrote:
My final link and then I'm done (this is in reponse to NASD's assertion that DNA was recovered etc....).  3/4 down on the page it shows some decent info.  Peace.
http://killtown.911review.org/flight77/inside.html

 
More nothing. The hole in the third ring of the building wasn't made by the noise of the plane, it was made by an engine that was found at the site of the hole.

dude's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-11-15

I'm a liar here's another
from: http://killtown.911review.org/oddities/911.html#WTC2_white_p lane
9/11 - Witnesses at the Pentagon report the smell of cordite, a smokeless explosive powder.

Gilah Goldsmith, personnel attorney at the Pentagon
"We saw a huge black cloud of smoke," she said, saying it smelled like cordite, or gun smoke." - Jewish News Weekly (09/21/01)

Don Perkal, deputy General Counsel, Office of the Secretary of Defense
"The airliner crashed between two and three hundred feet from my office in the Pentagon, just around a corner from where I work. I'm the deputy General Counsel, Washington Headquarters Services, Office of the Secretary of Defense. A slightly different calibration and I have no doubt I wouldn't be sending this to you. My colleagues felt the impact, which reminded them of an earthquake. People shouted in the corridor outside that a bomb had gone off upstairs on the main concourse in the building. No alarms sounded. I walked to my office, shut down my computer, and headed out. Even before stepping outside I could smell the cordite. Then I knew explosives had been set off somewhere.
Two explosions, a few minutes apart, prompted me to start walking." - McSweeney's Internet Tendency: The Works of Humankind (09/19/01)

- cordite - A smokeless explosive powder consisting of nitrocellulose, nitroglycerin, and petrolatum that has been dissolved in acetone, dried, and extruded in cords.
- Cordite is a smokeless propellent explosive made by combining two explosives: nitrocellulose and nitroglycerin. It has commonly been used in firearms since the early 20th Century. It has also been used in solid fuel rockets.

9/11 - Experienced air traffic controllers thought that the alleged Boeing 757 that was flying towards the Pentagon flew like a "military jetfighter."

‘Get These Planes on the Ground’, Air Traffic Controllers Recall Sept. 11
"The speed, the maneuverability, the way that he turned, we all thought in the radar room, all of us experienced air traffic controllers, that that was a military plane," says O'Brien. "You don't fly a 757 in that manner. It's unsafe.""And it went six, five, four. And I had it in my mouth to say, three, and all of a sudden the plane turned away. In the room, it was almost a sense of relief. This must be a fighter. This must be one of our guys sent in, scrambled to patrol our capital, and to protect our president, and we sat back in our chairs and breathed for just a second," says O'Brien.But the plane continued to turn right until it had made a 360-degree maneuver." - ABC (10/24/01) [Wayback Machine]

On Flight 77: 'Our Plane Is Being Hijacked'"But just as the plane seemed to be on a suicide mission into the White House, the unidentified pilot executed a pivot so tight that it reminded observers of a fighter jet maneuver.""Aviation sources said the plane was flown with extraordinary skill, making it highly likely that a trained pilot was at the helm, possibly one of the hijackers." - Washington Post (9/12/01)

Primary Target"New radar evidence obtained by CBS News strongly suggests that the hijacked jetliner which crashed into the Pentagon hit its intended target.""But the jet, flying at more than 400 mph, was too fast and too high when it neared the Pentagon at 9:35. The hijacker-pilots were then forced to execute a difficult high-speed descending turn." "Radar shows Flight 77 did a downward spiral, turning almost a complete circle and dropping the last 7,000 feet in two-and-a-half minutes.""The steep turn was so smooth, the sources say, it's clear there was no fight for control going on. And the complex maneuver suggests the hijackers had better flying skills than many investigators first believed." - CBS (9/21/01)

NASD Newbie's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-08-01

mikebutler222 wrote:
You may be aware that it’s common for hurricane and tornado survivors to say “it sounded like a freight train”. That doesn’t mean it really was a train.

Dude, Mike is mocking you.

dude's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-11-15

The video I referenced looked either like the from of a narrow tipped jet or a missle....either way...

NASD Newbie's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-08-01

How could somebody with an aluminum foil hat pass Series 7?

Philo Kvetch's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-05-17

Just how DID you do it, NASDy?

dude's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-11-15

NASD Newbie wrote:dude wrote:
How in the hell does anyone recover DNA from bodies that were scortched in an inferno like that one?

Unless the body is burned to ashes it is possible to recover DNA--I would think that you'd know that.

Bodies from the pentagon yeah, but from the plane?  You know I really don't have enough time to research this like I'd like to.  I know that mitochondrial DNA techniques can recover DNA from badly burned tissue and cells but how could all those people survive an explosion that basically disintegrated almost ALL of that plane(very little was recovered)?  Common sense dictates that if all that steel just evaporated what about all that flesh and bone?

dude's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-11-15

MikeB said:
More nothing. The hole in the third ring of the building wasn't made by the noise of the plane, it was made by an engine that was found at the site of the hole.
*******************************************
Yeah, it's that plane engine which my father in law said "is not a 757 engine, but from a smaller plane" that started to get me interested in all this crap.  Remember, he was a Boeing inspector for many years.

NASD Newbie's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-08-01

dude wrote:
Yeah, it's that plane engine which my father in law said "is not a 757 engine, but from a smaller plane" that started to get me interested in all this crap.  Remember, he was a Boeing inspector for many years.

And when was he allowed to personally inspect the engine?
Surely you're not saying that he made that judgement from looking at some photographs.
Where is the 757 that took off from Reagan and flew into the Pentagon--you know the one tracked by radar.
Why haven't the people who were on that plane phoned home if they were not involved in a crash?
Where was the missile fired from?

dude's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-11-15

You mean the one this guy flew:
9/11 - Flight 77 is allegedly flown into the Pentagon by 28 year old Saudi Arabian Hani Hanjour who has never flown a Boeing 757 in real life, was described by many of his former flight instructors as a "horrible pilot," is the only alleged hijacker to not have a passenger number or seat assignment, is thought that he might not have had a ticket to get on board the plane, and was unable to rent a single-engine Cessna 172 one month before the attacks because he had trouble controlling and landing it during a flight test.
"Staff members characterized Mr. Hanjour as polite, meek and very quiet. But most of all, the former employee said, they considered him a very bad pilot. "I'm still to this day amazed that he could have flown into the Pentagon," the former employee said. "He could not fly at all." - New York Times (05/04/02)
"I couldn't believe he had a commercial license of any kind with the skills that he had." Peggy Chevrette, Arizona flight school manager - CBS (05/10/02)
"Hijacking Suspects - Aboard American Airlines Flight 77, which took off from Washington Dulles Airport for Los Angeles and crashed into the Pentagon." - ABC (09/15/01)Alhamzi, Nawaq — Passenger No. 12 Almidhar, Khalid — Passenger No. 20, Seat 12B Alhamzi, Salem — Passenger No. 13, Seat 5F Moqed, Majed — Passenger No. 19, Seat 12A Hanjour, Hani — [N/A]
"His name [Hani Hanjour] was not on the American Airlines manifest for the flight because he may not have had a ticket." - Washington Post

Tracing Trail Of Hijackers
"The hijacker believed to have steered American Airlines Flight 77 on its fatal path toward the Pentagon recently honed his rusty flying skills at a small Maryland airport, and more than a year ago sought training at a flight school in Arizona.At Freeway Airport in Bowie, Md., 20 miles west of Washington, flight instructor Sheri Baxter instantly recognized the name of alleged hijacker Hani Hanjour when the FBI released a list of 19 suspects in the four hijackings. Hanjour, the only suspect on Flight 77 the FBI listed as a pilot, had come to the airport one month earlier seeking to rent a small plane.However, when Baxter and fellow instructor Ben Conner took the slender, soft-spoken Hanjour on three test runs during the second week of August, they found he had trouble controlling and landing the single-engine Cessna 172. Even though Hanjour showed a federal pilot's license and a log book cataloging 600 hours of flying experience, chief flight instructor Marcel Bernard declined to rent him a plane without more lessons.In the spring of 2000, Hanjour had asked to enroll in the CRM Airline Training Center in Scottsdale, Ariz., for advanced training, said the center's attorney, Gerald Chilton Jr. Hanjour had attended the school for three months in late 1996 and again in December 1997 but never finished coursework for a license to fly a single-engine aircraft, Chilton said.When Hanjour reapplied to the center last year, "We declined to provide training to him because we didn't think he was a good enough student when he was there in 1996 and 1997," Chilton said." - Newsday (12/23/01) [Archived:  Wayback Machine
 
********************************
 
Yet he was making manuevers that air traffic controlers thought were military fighter manuevers right?

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

dude wrote:
I'm a liar here's another
from: http://killtown.911review.org/oddities/911.html#WTC2_white_p lane
Here's a nice line by line take down of this lunacy;
http://www.ccdominoes.com/lc/lcg2.html

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

dude wrote:
MikeB said:
More nothing. The hole in the third ring of the building wasn't made by the noise of the plane, it was made by an engine that was found at the site of the hole.
*******************************************
Yeah, it's that plane engine which my father in law said "is not a 757 engine, but from a smaller plane" that started to get me interested in all this crap.  Remember, he was a Boeing inspector for many years.

Then he was right, and based on seeing pieces of engine wreckage on a TV screen he either saw something none of the investigator on the gorund saw OR every FAA investigator is in on the conspiracy, or he was simply wrong. You tell me which is more likely.
BTW, I was mistaken, it was the front landing gear that made the hole.

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

dude wrote:NASD Newbie wrote:dude wrote:
How in the hell does anyone recover DNA from bodies that were scortched in an inferno like that one?

Unless the body is burned to ashes it is possible to recover DNA--I would think that you'd know that.

Bodies from the pentagon yeah, but from the plane?  You know I really don't have enough time to research this like I'd like to.  I know that mitochondrial DNA techniques can recover DNA from badly burned tissue and cells but how could all those people survive an explosion that basically disintegrated almost ALL of that plane(very little was recovered)?  Common sense dictates that if all that steel just evaporated what about all that flesh and bone?

 
The steel didn't "just evaporate", pieces large and small were everywhere and appear in many pictures. The same applies to the flesh and bone.
Now, ask yourself this one, if it wasn't possible, what's kept every DNA expert on the planet from coming forward to point that out, or are they all in on it too?
 

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

dude wrote:
You mean the one this guy flew:
9/11 - Flight 77 is allegedly flown into the Pentagon by 28 year old Saudi Arabian Hani Hanjour who has never flown a Boeing 757 in real life, was described by many of his former flight instructors as a "horrible pilot," is the only alleged hijacker to not have a passenger number or seat assignment, is thought that he might not have had a ticket to get on board the plane, and was unable to rent a single-engine Cessna 172 one month before the attacks because he had trouble controlling and landing it during a flight test.
Yes, that's the guy. There's nothing in your laundry list there that says he couldn't control the plane in flight even if he sucked at landing it.
Yet he was making manuevers that air traffic controlers thought were military fighter manuevers right?
You might want to reread that quote. The ATC people said they thought it was a fighter not because executing the move with a jetliner would have required a great deal of skill, but because they said it would be "unsafe" to do it in a 757.

Please or Register to post comments.

Industry Newsletters
Investment Category Sponsor Links

 

Careers Category Sponsor Links

Sponsored Introduction Continue on to (or wait seconds) ×