1810 replies to this topic

[skyeagle409]

NocturnalWatcher, on 16 October 2012 - 05:53 PM, said:

i dont buy that building 7 came down from fire alone.

Since we have evidence of fires within WTC7, but no evidence of explosions nor evidence of explosives within the rubble of WTC7, simply means that fire, nor explosives, was responsible for the collapse of WTC7.

Quote

mr rodriguez story may have been a tiny bit inconsistent but that doesnt mean hes lying or discredited. i dont see any reason why he would make it up.

Let's hear what William Rodriguez has said.

Quote

William Rodriguez worked on the basement level of the north tower and was in the building when the first plane struck his building.

"We heard a loud rumble, then all of a sudden we heard another rumble like someone moving a whole lot of furniture," Rodriguez said. "And then the elevator opened and a man came into our office and all of his skin was off."

http://archives.cnn....ew.york.terror/

Now, let's review this video and understand there is no sound of an explosion prior to American 11 striking WTC1.



Since no explosions are heard prior to American 11 striking WTC1, is an indication that no explosives were used and why there are no explosions seen on video prior to  impact.

Edited by skyeagle409, 16 October 2012 - 06:40 PM.

[Babe Ruth]

RaptorBites, on 16 October 2012 - 04:09 PM, said:

So the Ross and Furlong paper could be incorrect.

Funny, so tell me again how this is considered conclusive evidence in support of the WTC explosives then?  You base your evidence on a 50% chance that it is correct?  No very bright there.



I'm just getting down to the details.  As I have already said.  It does boil down to mere seconds.  If you want the truth about whether or not explosions happened in the WTC prior to the planes crashing then it comes down to mere seconds.

It seems like your only argument here is by claiming those of us who follow the Official Narrative are backing up the Commission Report 100%.  Thats your argument and direction you chose to discredit someone like myself.

Did i not just state that the FAA confirmation time of when both planes crashed could have a few second discrepancy?  How is that following the report 100%?



Rightly so.  How hard is it defending your no plane at the Pentagon position?  Which is also clearly a lie.



Prove to me he was put under DURESS from the Pentagon.

Where's your proof??????????

Again Babe, you want to claim all these things without providing proof to your accusations.

Show me proof Wally Miller was put under DURESS by the Pentagon and maybe I will take you seriously from now on.

Yes Raptor, Ross & Furlong might be wrong.  Yes, it is possible that their calculations started based upon an invalid assumption, that being that the time offered in the Commission report did not determine and calculate the position of the radar antenna in determining the actual time of collision.

But they make an assumption, and I accept it, that the time is accurate enough for sake of discussion.  They assume that if it accurate enough for the high and mighty government Commission, it is accurate enough for them.  I accept that, understanding that you MIGHT BE RIGHT.

Keep in mind Raptor, you are unable to prove that you are right on your theory, at least as far as I've seen so far here.  You are unable to prove your theory, and it could very well be you are wrong.  Who knows, maybe some number cruncher that worked for the Commission saw the same possibility for error that you do, and researched it.  I don't know, and you don't know.

That you make such a mountain out of a mole hill suggests to me some measure of desperation.  I can relate.

What their findings do is very simple--they corroborate the Rodriguez testimony that explosions (large enough to leave a seismic footprint) happened in the basement of one of the towers BEFORE the airplane struck.  That's all Raptor.  That's all it proves, that Rodriguez' story is backed up by seismic evidence.

You're just getting down to details?!?!   Bravo!  The funny part is that the details that contradict your position are conveniently ignored by yourself, or said to be lies, or said to not exist.  You still cannot explain, and have now quit trying, the massive heat that was present that day and lasted for weeks.  Details like FDR not being assigned to the accident aircraft, not being assigned to ANY aircraft.  Cell phone calls that are impossible to be true and aerodynamic maneuvers that several hundred line pilots in the 75/76 class say THEY could not do.

Gimme a break Raptor.

You can kid yourself all you want.  Still you offer the best posts here to reply to, but there is only so much artifice that I can stand.

You want to pick and choose from the Commission report like you're in a cafeteria line.  It's juvenile, and indicative of a man attempting to defend the indefensible.  Sorry.

[Babe Ruth]

NocturnalWatcher, on 16 October 2012 - 03:56 PM, said:

just a question because ive esearched a lot about 911 but i never came across the list of passangers for any of the fights. im sure its out there as ive ony really watched docs on it.

but... why hasnt anyone took the list of passangers who supposedly died, gone to each one of tbe families, interview and try to verify those people were infact on the plane and are now dead.

has this been done

The surviving family members can be, for the sake of discussion, divided into 2 groups.  Those who survived the death of a family member killed at WTC, and those who survived a family member killed in the several airplanes.

Both groups were eventually offered settlements in a class type action, and most everybody accepted the payout, but not all.  When accepting the payout, the survivors agreed not to talk about it.

Because the government refused to conduct an investigation, many private citizens began investigations on their own, as best they could.

What some of those citizens discovered was that of the 2 groups--airplanes and WTC towers--the latter group was most interested in talking about it, just to learn anything they could about the death of their family member, while the former group did not like to talk at all.  Did not want to be interviewed or offer information, and would not return phone calls.

That behavior provides some degree of insight.....

[skyeagle409]

NocturnalWatcher, on 16 October 2012 - 05:53 PM, said:

ok black boxes could possibly been destroed but i dont buy it.

Buy it, and I must add that during aircraft accident investigations, the FAA and the NTSB used data and evidence from other sources in conjunction with black box data.

Quote

i never even see that evidence for the superthermite before,...

Because thermite was not used in the destruction of the WTC buildings.

Quote

the one i seen was some scientist who tested the dust from 911 in a lab and found traces of superthermite, i think.

Ever wondered why thermite is not widely used by demolition companies? Did you know that thermite is not an explosive?

Quote

...
also the reasoning for the pentagon crash is absurd.

Why?

Quote

...if they have the other crashes on film and all this controversy surrounding 911 surely they just release the tape, the people have a right to eee what happened.

9/11 conspiracist saw what happened on video when American 11 and United 175 struck the WTC buildings and we watched as 9/11 conspiracist sought to use the videos to push their disinformation. Besides, I have already identified a B-757 in an image taken at the Pentagon because I am familiar with the B-757.

[RaptorBites]

Babe Ruth, on 16 October 2012 - 06:49 PM, said:

Yes Raptor, Ross & Furlong might be wrong.  Yes, it is possible that their calculations started based upon an invalid assumption, that being that the time offered in the Commission report did not determine and calculate the position of the radar antenna in determining the actual time of collision.

then you base your theories on assuptions and not on actual hard evidence.

Not surprised at the least.

Babe Ruth, on 16 October 2012 - 06:49 PM, said:

But they make an assumption, and I accept it, that the time is accurate enough for sake of discussion.  They assume that if it accurate enough for the high and mighty government Commission, it is accurate enough for them.  I accept that, understanding that you MIGHT BE RIGHT.

then you base your theories on assuptions and not on actual evidence.

Not surprised at the least.

Babe Ruth, on 16 October 2012 - 06:49 PM, said:

Keep in mind Raptor, you are unable to prove that you are right on your theory, at least as far as I've seen so far here.  You are unable to prove your theory, and it could very well be you are wrong.  Who knows, maybe some number cruncher that worked for the Commission saw the same possibility for error that you do, and researched it.  I don't know, and you don't know.

then you base your theories on assuptions and not on actual evidence.

Not surprised at the least.

Babe Ruth, on 16 October 2012 - 06:49 PM, said:

That you make such a mountain out of a mole hill suggests to me some measure of desperation.  I can relate.

So far the Ross and Furlong report is the only piece of evidence that you have brought up to support your explosives theory.

It does not bode well that it cannot really stand up to scruitny now does it?

Babe Ruth, on 16 October 2012 - 06:49 PM, said:

What their findings do is very simple--they corroborate the Rodriguez testimony that explosions (large enough to leave a seismic footprint) happened in the basement of one of the towers BEFORE the airplane struck.  That's all Raptor.  That's all it proves, that Rodriguez' story is backed up by seismic evidence.

Rodriguez said rumble then later changed it to explosions.  How is that evidence of a man willing to tell the actual truth.

Babe Ruth, on 16 October 2012 - 06:49 PM, said:

You're just getting down to details?!?!   Bravo!  The funny part is that the details that contradict your position are conveniently ignored by yourself, or said to be lies, or said to not exist.  You still cannot explain, and have now quit trying, the massive heat that was present that day and lasted for weeks.  Details like FDR not being assigned to the accident aircraft, not being assigned to ANY aircraft.  Cell phone calls that are impossible to be true and aerodynamic maneuvers that several hundred line pilots in the 75/76 class say THEY could not do.

Everything you said in this one statement has already been disputed multiple of times.  Either your age has you forgetting that you have made claims on your personal experiences and knowledge in the field of aviation that has been ridiculed by members of this forum that have actual piloting experience.

Babe Ruth, on 16 October 2012 - 06:49 PM, said:

Gimme a break Raptor.

I have given you a break.  I have asked you for evidence.  I have asked many things from you BR>  Yet you still ignore the facts and go by life experiences and whatever it is that you want to call "common sense".

Babe Ruth, on 16 October 2012 - 06:49 PM, said:

You can kid yourself all you want.  Still you offer the best posts here to reply to, but there is only so much artifice that I can stand.

It is not me that is kidding myself.  It is you.

Babe Ruth, on 16 October 2012 - 06:49 PM, said:

You want to pick and choose from the Commission report like you're in a cafeteria line.  It's juvenile, and indicative of a man attempting to defend the indefensible.  Sorry.

Excuse me?  When did i pick and choose from the commision report?

I merely picked the tpoic that dealt specifically with the Ross and Furlong report.  When did i touch base with any other specific topic in that report?

[skyeagle409]

Babe Ruth, on 16 October 2012 - 06:49 PM, said:

What their findings do is very simple--they corroborate the Rodriguez testimony that explosions (large enough to leave a seismic footprint) happened in the basement of one of the towers BEFORE the airplane struck.  That's all Raptor.  That's all it proves, that Rodriguez' story is backed up by seismic evidence.

Considering that there is no explosion in the video prior to American 11 striking WTC1 and the fact  that William Rodriquez says he heard rumblings, not explosions, and the fact that seimic montors in the area did not detect explosions prior to American 11 striking WTC1, simply means you are making it all up.

Quote

details like FDR not being assigned to the accident aircraft, not being assigned to ANY aircraft.

I guess you didn't know that has no relevance because you have never been involved in anything related to aviation before. i guess you were unaware that the FAA and the NSTB uses other means and  data to verify FDR data.

Quote

Cell phone calls that are impossible...

How amusing when I have used cell phones in flight, which once again, proves that you are just making things up.

Quote

...to be true and aerodynamic maneuvers that several hundred line pilots in the 75/76 class say THEY could not do.

How amusing that I have performed a similar maneuver as a low-time student pilot. Military and airline pilots I have spoken with do not support 9/11 conspiracy claims either. So once again, you are just making things up as you go.

Quote

You want to pick and choose from the Commission report like you're in a cafeteria line.  It's juvenile, and indicative of a man attempting to defend the indefensible.  Sorry.

Considering you have yet to produce a single shred of evidence that refutes the official story, what  more is there to say?!  Basically speaking, not all 9/11 conspiracist agree with you either.

Edited by skyeagle409, 16 October 2012 - 07:18 PM.

[RaptorBites]

Babe Ruth, on 16 October 2012 - 06:56 PM, said:

The surviving family members can be, for the sake of discussion, divided into 2 groups.  Those who survived the death of a family member killed at WTC, and those who survived a family member killed in the several airplanes.

Both groups were eventually offered settlements in a class type action, and most everybody accepted the payout, but not all.  When accepting the payout, the survivors agreed not to talk about it.

Because the government refused to conduct an investigation, many private citizens began investigations on their own, as best they could.

What some of those citizens discovered was that of the 2 groups--airplanes and WTC towers--the latter group was most interested in talking about it, just to learn anything they could about the death of their family member, while the former group did not like to talk at all.  Did not want to be interviewed or offer information, and would not return phone calls.

That behavior provides some degree of insight.....

any proof of this independant study?

[NocturnalWatcher]

you ask me for proof that fire alone didnt bring it down. as far as ivebeen told its the only skyscraper to ever come down from fire alone, and was deemed impossible by experts.

i agree the boxes could have been destroyed but i dont believe they were. can yiu discredit the  volunteer who says he wa there when they found it in the rubble?
also ve heard of casez where the black box is destroyed but never seenwhere it was never found, has there ever been another case like that?

if steven jones is a scientist and found thermite i  the dust what does it matter about the residue? if thermite was actually in the dust at all what xplanation would there be for that. also im tmore incli ed to belie e a scientist than a random forum person.






f

[NocturnalWatcher]

also u mentioned the foia but u still never gave a singlegood reason why the pentagon tapes were never shown.

babe ruth why do u think tbe other group wont talk?

yoy identified the b 257 from a photo? i wouldnt base mybeliefs on a photo, something thatcanbe easil faked.

sorry formy hoorible writing im on worlds worst tablet

[skyeagle409]

NocturnalWatcher, on 16 October 2012 - 07:21 PM, said:

you ask me for proof that fire alone didnt bring it down. as far as ivebeen told its the only skyscraper to ever come down from fire alone, and was deemed impossible by experts.

On the contrary, I have posted articles and photos where fire collapsed the steel structure of the Windsor building in Spain to where only the concrete core was left standing. I also posted facts surrounding the collapse of  three steel structured buildings in Thailand due to fires.

You need to stay away from those 9/11 conspiracy websites because I have caught them pushing disinformation and misinformation on the Internet.

Quote

if steven jones is a scientist and found thermite

Steven Jones didn't find thermite because the ingredients were used in other materials used at the time the WTC buildings were constructed, a fact that left Steven Jones standing in the cold  . To further add, Steven Jones has now been discredited for pushing disnformation and misinformation.

[RaptorBites]

NocturnalWatcher, on 16 October 2012 - 07:21 PM, said:

you ask me for proof that fire alone didnt bring it down. as far as ivebeen told its the only skyscraper to ever come down from fire alone, and was deemed impossible by experts.

As far as you have been told?  By whom?  Any credentials on engineering?

Babe Ruth, on 16 October 2012 - 06:49 PM, said:

i agree the boxes could have been destroyed but i dont believe they were. can yiu discredit the  volunteer who says he wa there when they found it in the rubble?
also ve heard of casez where the black box is destroyed but never seenwhere it was never found, has there ever been another case like that?

1 witness out of thousands that where there.  The odds of that aren't really in his/her favor.

If you can get me a name of this witness I will be glad to look up the information.

Babe Ruth, on 16 October 2012 - 06:49 PM, said:

if steven jones is a scientist and found thermite i  the dust what does it matter about the residue? if thermite was actually in the dust at all what xplanation would there be for that. also im tmore incli ed to belie e a scientist than a random forum person.

random forum person who is asking for evidence of the amount of aluminum oxide to corroborate the thermite theory.

Are you willing to believe a scientist that for some reason leaves an important piece of information such as that from his analysis?

[skyeagle409]

NocturnalWatcher, on 16 October 2012 - 07:24 PM, said:

also u mentioned the foia but u still never gave a singlegood reason why the pentagon tapes were never shown.

What if all of the tapes were made available? The 9/11 conspiracist would simply distort the videos as they had done with the videos of American 11 and United 175.

Quote

yoy identified the b 257 from a photo? i wouldnt base mybeliefs on a photo, something thatcanbe easil faked.

It was not a fake. Furthermore, photos of B-757 wreckage inside and outside the Pentagon have been provided as well.

Edited by skyeagle409, 16 October 2012 - 07:38 PM.

[NocturnalWatcher]

ive never read a conspiracy website except this one.  

you guys seem to have an answee fr everything, but i dont know enough about certai  tthings to know if what youre saying is true o just somecrap

[skyeagle409]

NocturnalWatcher, on 16 October 2012 - 07:41 PM, said:

ive never read a conspiracy website except this one.  

you guys seem to have an answee fr everything, but i dont know enough about certai  tthings to know if what youre saying is true o just somecrap

Check this out.

Edited by skyeagle409, 16 October 2012 - 07:45 PM.

[Babe Ruth]

RaptorBites, on 16 October 2012 - 07:00 PM, said:

any proof of this independant study?

It's old information Raptor, going back 7 or 8 years or more I'm guessing.  No, I don't have the link to information I read that long ago, and even if I did, most likely you would 'debunk' it somehow or other.