TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Do you believe there is a U.S. government cover-up surrounding 9/11?
Pages (162): « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 [58] 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 »

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN trancer-x!! welcome back! i hope the evil government's experiments on you weren't too painful. how did you escape their black operation? you'll be pleased to know there are a bunch of new crazies in here to join you way out left field and its been more than a year hasn't it? feels like ages!

Thanks, bro! And hey, if gawky sarcasm is what it takes for you to feel like you're the 'normal' one here, then go on and get it all out of your system

I mean, who really even cares about the world that we live in? Do what's best for YOU! (said with tongue firmly planted in cheek)


Anyway, you obviously haven't done much (if any at all) due diligence on the majority of the topics in question here but that's okay because it's probably about time for you to wake up and gain some intellectual curiosty anyhow. I mean you are here to GAIN KNOWLEDGE and not add to that stinking pile of ignorance, aren't you?

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X Thanks, bro! And hey, if gawky sarcasm is what it takes for you to feel like you're the 'normal' one here, then go on and get it all out of your system I mean, who really even cares about the world that we live in? Do what's best for YOU! (said with tongue firmly planted in cheek) Anyway, you obviously haven't done much (if any at all) due diligence on the majority of the topics in question here but that's okay because it's probably about time for you to wake up and gain some intellectual curiosty anyhow. I mean you are here to GAIN KNOWLEDGE and not add to that stinking pile of ignorance, aren't you?

ahhh, same old trancer-x.

and actually, ive done a whole lot of due diligence in here. sure, lots of ad hominem attacks as well, but most of those in here are just as abusive so i dont feel too bad about it. we even have a qualified civil engineer popping in from time to time to show you all the scientific error of your ways.

in all seriousness though, its good to have you back. despite our differences i love your articulate nature. i look fwd to seeing your contributions in this here thread

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN ahhh, same old trancer-x. and actually, ive done a whole lot of due diligence in here. sure, lots of ad hominem attacks as well, but most of those in here are just as abusive so i dont feel too bad about it. we even have a qualified civil engineer popping in from time to time to show you all the scientific error of your ways. in all seriousness though, its good to have you back. despite our differences i love your articulate nature. i look fwd to seeing your contributions in this here thread

lol

Well, you can take a kid out of the mean streets of Baltimore but you can't take the 'mean streets of Baltimore' out of the kid.

Yeah, I still need to work on my patience. I know I'm trying.

i only moved over to the PDD in the past year so i dont recognize you but as long as you can string together more articulate and well sourced arguments than your fellow tinfoil hatter culrout...... ill be more than happy to engage in intelligent debate.



just dont mention thermite or controlled demolition and we will get along splendidly


now my one question about this whole pilots for 911 group is if they indeed found this data on the publicly obtained black box data, dont you think the gov would have adultered teh data to prove its theories if it were indeed a cover up? it just doesnt make sense to me that they would let something like this leak out....

^^exactly! wheres the common sense? my problem with too many of the CTs is that they fail this common sense test. just like people pointing at the BBC reporting the collapse of building 7 prematurely- as if someone from the govt let their secret plot slip for some reason we're meant to believe that the government were able to engineer the top-down collapse of a massive skyscraper without anyone noticing their involvement, but they dont have the presence of mind to alter a black box? please.

and more importantly, no CT has a plausible explanation for what happened to the passengers, crew and plane (or why the hundreds of witnesses that saw the plane hit are somehow incorrect). they don't explain what hit those lamp posts if the plane didnt. but most importantly, they don't explain why on earth the government would bother with a charade at the pentagon when they already had the real deal with the WTCs??

whats really more telling however, is the repitition of known fallacies in that article

quote:

(1) The hit point at the Pentagon was too small to accommodate a 100-ton airliner with a 125-foot wingspan and a tail that stands 44 feet above the ground; the kind and quantity of debris was wrong for a Boeing 757: there were no wings, no fuselage, no seats, no bodies, no luggage, no tail! Not even the engines were recovered, and they are practically indestructible. (2) Of an estimate 84 videotapes of the crash, the three that have been released by the Pentagon do not show a Boeing 757 hitting the building, as even Bill O'Reilly admitted when one was shown on "The Factor". At 155 feet, the plane was more than twice as long as the 77-foot Pentagon is high and should have been visible. There are indications of a much smaller plane, but not a Boeing 757. (3) Indeed, the aerodynamics of flight would have made the official trajectory--flying more than 500 mph barely above ground level--physically impossible, because of the accumulation of a massive pocket of compressed gas (air) beneath the fuselage; and if it had come it at an angle instead, it would have created a massive crater; but there is no crater and the official trajectory is impossible.

given how poor the research of the 9/11 movement tends to be, and their complete lack of finishing their theory with a plausible explanation for explaining the bodies, personal effects and plane debris at the crash site, i find their analysis completely dubious and not to be trusted.

quote:

Originally posted by colonelcrisp i only moved over to the PDD in the past year so i dont recognize you but as long as you can string together more articulate and well sourced arguments than your fellow tinfoil hatter culrout...... ill be more than happy to engage in intelligent debate. just dont mention thermite or controlled demolition and we will get along splendidly now my one question about this whole pilots for 911 group is if they indeed found this data on the publicly obtained black box data, dont you think the gov would have adultered teh data to prove its theories if it were indeed a cover up? it just doesnt make sense to me that they would let something like this leak out....

They got it through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)

I don't think that you can alter black box data but I could be wrong.

And yeah, I don't think that Tucker Carlson bought the controlled demo theory, either.



Oh, and by the way, does anyone know why the flight that was shot down over - errr,
I mean crashed in PA, is being stored in Iron Mountain?

um, so trancer- why would the government shoot down its own plane that was part of their elaborate plan?

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X They got it through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) I don't think that you can alter black box data but I could be wrong.

older FDR (flight data recorders) as well as CVR (cockpit voice recorders) used magnetic tape to store data, newer models use solid state technology (RAM memory sticks) to store data. since both are rewritable mediums, any and all of the data can be altered if you know how the data storage system works for that particular medium. in short, since it isnt ROM data, anything goes.

quote:

Originally posted by colonelcrisp older FDR (flight data recorders) as well as CVR (cockpit voice recorders) used magnetic tape to store data, newer models use solid state technology (RAM memory sticks) to store data. since both are rewritable mediums, any and all of the data can be altered if you know how the data storage system works for that particular medium. in short, since it isnt ROM data, anything goes.

The FDR originated from the NTSB (National Transportation Safety Board).

If there was nothing to hide then the NTSB sent the original data as per the Freedom Of Information Act request. Some data was missing though, about 30-45 seconds of the flight I recall.

This flight path does not match the "official" story flight path either.

you still havent answered anybody's questions regarding the passengers, dead bodies etc. until you can provide plausible explanations for these you havent got a leg to stand on

And you still have not answered why the bull shit story you believe in contradicts itself time and time again.

It's no wonder why you rant on and on slaving over this thread, the official story has your petty little mind all mixed up.

What sucks even more is you realize the majority of people disagree with you also.

Poor soul.

quote:

Originally posted by culorut And you still have not answered why the bull shit story you believe in contradicts itself time and time again. It's no wonder why you rant on and on slaving over this thread, the official story has your petty little mind all mixed up. What sucks even more is you realize the majority of people disagree with you also. Poor soul.

^^ which is a typical response i would expect from a CTer unable to bridge the gap between fact and fantasy. ask a simple question, get attitude and ignorance in return. good work child.

and again, "the majority" of people that disagree with me (on TA) are complete morons. exceptions being trancer and shaolin. not that it matters, ive already attempted to explain logical fallacies to you, but (again) its obvious you are incapable of understanding.

as for supposed "contradictions", considering your complete lack of ability to assess dubious research (i still laugh about your BBC argument, serious LOL) it really isnt enough for you to label something a contradiction. indeed, its quite telling when you can carry on about "contradictions" yet fail to answer your own, ie what happened to flight 77 really? idiot.

i hope you try harder in your highschool studies coz i think real life is going to be a bit of a shock for you

quote:

i hope you try harder in your highschool studies coz i think real life is going to be a bit of a shock for you

Well past all the schooling child.

In fact I am probably much older and definitely wiser than you.

quote:

Originally posted by culorut Well past all the schooling child. In fact I am probably much older and definitely wiser than you.

the biggest flaw with their "theory" is that they have no data from the actual impact. all they have is the approach. which it may well describe the last heading, altitude and trajectory of the plane, it is not conclusive at all. planes flying at such low altitudes experience all sorts of wonky phenomena caused by the interaction with the airfoil and ground air currents. cold air pockets can cause vertical loss of altitude, downwash vaccum under the wings etc. there is no conclusive evidence to prove either side without the last 30 seconds of data. and frankly if the NTSB wanted to cover up a huge conspiracy, i doubt they would have made the data so obviously flawed that a bunch of pilots can figure out their ruse.....

quote:

Originally posted by colonelcrisp the biggest flaw with their "theory" is that they have no data from the actual impact. all they have is the approach. which it may well describe the last heading, altitude and trajectory of the plane, it is not conclusive at all. planes flying at such low altitudes experience all sorts of wonky phenomena caused by the interaction with the airfoil and ground air currents. cold air pockets can cause vertical loss of altitude, downwash vaccum under the wings etc. there is no conclusive evidence to prove either side without the last 30 seconds of data. and frankly if the NTSB wanted to cover up a huge conspiracy, i doubt they would have made the data so obviously flawed that a bunch of pilots can figure out their ruse.....

It's doubtful the NTSB altered the data from the FDR but then again it is possible they could have as well. They will not however answer why the light poles where knocked down since the data on the flight recorder shows that the plane was at a much higher altitude.

Did you watch the video I posted a few posts back? It is the Pilots for Truth breakdown of the flight data recorder, Pandora's Black Box.

Thank goodness for people like Daniel Hopsicker!!!

quote:

Originally posted by culorut Did you watch the video I posted a few posts back? It is the Pilots for Truth breakdown of the flight data recorder, Pandora's Black Box.

No, he didn't watch it and neither did Shakka. They don't seem to be too interested in finding the truth.

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X No, he didn't watch it and neither did Shakka. They don't seem to be too interested in finding the truth.

They do not seem interested in facing denial.

They seem much more happy lashing out at others with insults and those retarded and much overused tin foil hat pictures. Great way to win debates.

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X No, he didn't watch it and neither did Shakka. They don't seem to be too interested in finding the truth.

no its more that i find youtube and google CT videos about as reliable of a news source as CNN.......

quote:

Originally posted by colonelcrisp no its more that i find youtube and google CT videos about as reliable of a news source as CNN.......

I think that you just don't want to hear any evidence to the contrary.



Hosted By:
London 9/11 Truth Group

When:
08 Jun 2007, 19:00

Where:
Mahatma Gandhi Hall, Indian YMCA
41 Fitzroy Square
London, LO W1
United Kingdom


A Challenge to Experts!


Separating Facts from Fiction - Why the Official Account of 9/11 is contradicted by genuine Scientific Research


with Gordon Ross and Calum Douglas

at 7.00pm on Friday 8th June at The Mahatma Gandhi Hall, Indian YMCA, 41 Fitzroy Square, London W1 (nearest tube Warren St or Great Portland St).

Admission Free

We would to like warmly to invite you all to an evening with Gordon Ross, M.Eng and Calum Douglas.

Gordon Ross holds two Engineering degrees and is author of several published scientific papers. Calum Douglas is an Engineering undergraduate from Oxford Brookes University and senior researcher at Pilots for 911 Truth.

Mr Ross has been researching the collapse of the WTC towers and Mr Douglas provided exclusive date from the Flight Data Recorder of Flight 77 alleged to have impacted the Pentagon on 9/11.

The pair will give an authoritative presentation of their research to a public audience in central London on the 8th of June. Their intended audience will be made up of both sceptics and interested parties who want to hear more.

We invite you to join us, whether it is to challenge their analysis or to find out more about the debate over the science of 9/11, which the mainstream media has failed to address.

http://www.pilotsfor911truth.org
http://www.thepentacon.com
http://ae911truth.org/

Very, very nice videoclip, Trancer ;-) especially the parts featuring the recorded phone conversations ;-) LOL

Agh, the denial never ends!

2 cents, because that's what political forums are about.

I've had the argument before and here's where I end up.

Those who point out that there was a cover up seem to spend a whole lot of time and money trying to be noisy but very little time or money on hiring engineers to model the event. I have yest to see more then a grade 9 science math based description of the fall of the towers.

Noam Chompsky is recorded pointing out that if there was a cover up the amount of people involved and the massive scale of the operation suggest that there would be more concret evidence surfacing saying as much. I tend to agree with him on this point.

Dispite the fan fare and at times poorly grounded fanatisism around the whole incident, the fall of WTC 7, the third building, IS quite suspect. I would be interested in seeing a couple of graduate level civil engineers spend 6 months to a year examining this occurance. The cost would be some where in the order of 250 - 500k to do.

quote:

Those who point out that there was a cover up seem to spend a whole lot of time and money trying to be noisy but very little time or money on hiring engineers to model the event. I have yest to see more then a grade 9 science math based description of the fall of the towers.

The government should have spent more money on studying the collapses in the first place. If they say the towers fell the way they did they could have spent more then they did on investigating Clinton over a blow job. If all you have read on the issue seems "grade 9ish" you need to start looking a little harder, there is plenty of solid material available.

quote:

Noam Chompsky is recorded pointing out that if there was a cover up the amount of people involved and the massive scale of the operation suggest that there would be more concret evidence surfacing saying as much. I tend to agree with him on this point.

Chomsky is wrong, they have covered up many things for much longer then 9/11. In fact I think Chomsky is a pussy for backing out with that notion.

quote:

Dispite the fan fare and at times poorly grounded fanatisism around the whole incident, the fall of WTC 7, the third building, IS quite suspect. I would be interested in seeing a couple of graduate level civil engineers spend 6 months to a year examining this occurance. The cost would be some where in the order of 250 - 500k to do.

Yes WTC7 was demolished just like WTC 1 and 2, NIST will be releasing their version of the WTC7 collapse some time this fall. Expect it to be highly revolved around the fact that there where the fuel tanks in the building which caused the perfectly symmetrical collapse.

After almost 6 years they have had more then enough time to come up with more BS, the public does not need another biased 600 page fairy tale. It will be torn to shreds just like the 9/11 commission report.

quote:

Originally posted by culorut If all you have read on the issue seems "grade 9ish" you need to start looking a little harder, there is plenty of solid material available.

wrong. no peer review = you got nothing.

quote:

Originally posted by culorut Chomsky is wrong, they have covered up many things for much longer then 9/11. In fact I think Chomsky is a pussy for backing out with that notion.

somehow im gonna listen to the musings of one of the world's great intellects over an under-educated child like yourself.

quote:

Originally posted by culorut Yes WTC7 was demolished just like WTC 1 and 2, NIST will be releasing their version of the WTC7 collapse some time this fall. Expect it to be highly revolved around the fact that there where the fuel tanks in the building which caused the perfectly symmetrical collapse.

it was hardly perfectly symmetrical. that's about as bad as your people's contention that WTC1&2 fell on their own "footprint". yeah, coz their footprint was 400 feet in every direction.

quote:

Originally posted by culorut After almost 6 years they have had more then enough time to come up with more BS, the public does not need another biased 600 page fairy tale. It will be torn to shreds just like the 9/11 commission report.

and yet your side of the argument still hasn't produced anything near the complexity of the NIST report. you'v had six years too. what's keeping you?

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.