IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 7th May 2011, 12:27 PM   #1
Anders Lindman
Penultimate Amazing
 
Anders Lindman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 13,833
Jet engine of wrong type found near Ground Zero

"WTC Jet Engine Confirmed NOT From Boeing 767
...
I am an A&P mechanic for a major airline. I overhaul 767's. The engines are NOT from a 767. No 767 in existence uses CFM56's. Not enough power to lift a '67." -- From: http://www.rense.com/general63/wtcc.htm[/quote]
Anders Lindman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2011, 12:31 PM   #2
RecoveringYuppy
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 12,644
You must have cut and pasted "rense.com". If you'd actually typed the letters yourself something would have caught your attention.
RecoveringYuppy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2011, 12:36 PM   #3
Anders Lindman
Penultimate Amazing
 
Anders Lindman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 13,833
Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy View Post
You must have cut and pasted "rense.com". If you'd actually typed the letters yourself something would have caught your attention.
That's no proof that the claim is false. As I said: http://www.internationalskeptics.com...1&postcount=55

This time I will win.
Anders Lindman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2011, 12:40 PM   #4
Edx
Philosopher
 
Edx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 5,642
So an unknown "airliner mechanic" says its not from a Boeing 767 posted on Rense of all places, and you think thats all you need?

Why do you have such low standards of evidence Anders?

My first question would be why do you think these conspirators would intentionally plant an engine that wasn't from a Boeing 767 in the streets in order to fake evidence that a Boeing 767 crashed .... especially when they know people will take pictures of it and then someone could just stand up and say that it couldn't be from that plane?

Isn't it more likely that this claim is nonsence, even if there was no plane?

Last edited by Edx; 7th May 2011 at 12:54 PM.
Edx is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2011, 12:41 PM   #5
NoahFence
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 22,131
So what's the suggestion? That a 767 hit the tower, but a 737 engine was planted 3 blocks away?
NoahFence is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2011, 12:42 PM   #6
Quad4_72
AI-EE-YAH!
 
Quad4_72's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 6,354
Originally Posted by Anders Lindman View Post
"WTC Jet Engine Confirmed NOT From Boeing 767
...
I am an A&P mechanic for a major airline. I overhaul 767's. The engines are NOT from a 767. No 767 in existence uses CFM56's. Not enough power to lift a '67." -- From: http://www.rense.com/general63/wtcc.htm
I looked at my reply window trying to think of something witty to respond with for like 5 minutes. I got nothin. The stupid dripping off your post just leaves me at a loss for words.
__________________
Looks like the one on top has a magazine, thus needs less reloading. Also, the muzzle shroud makes it less likely for a spree killer to burn his hands. The pistol grip makes it more comfortable for the spree killer to shoot. thaiboxerken

Last edited by Quad4_72; 7th May 2011 at 12:44 PM.
Quad4_72 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2011, 12:43 PM   #7
Quad4_72
AI-EE-YAH!
 
Quad4_72's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 6,354
Originally Posted by NoahFence View Post
So what's the suggestion? That a 767 hit the tower, but a 737 engine was planted 3 blocks away?
He is just asking question. I know, it hurts my head as well.
__________________
Looks like the one on top has a magazine, thus needs less reloading. Also, the muzzle shroud makes it less likely for a spree killer to burn his hands. The pistol grip makes it more comfortable for the spree killer to shoot. thaiboxerken
Quad4_72 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2011, 12:46 PM   #8
Anders Lindman
Penultimate Amazing
 
Anders Lindman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 13,833
Originally Posted by Edx View Post
So an unknown "airliner mechanic" says its not from a Boeing 767 posted on Rense of all places, and you think thats all you need?

Why do you have such low standards of evidence Anders?

My first question would be why do you think these conspirators would intentionally plant an engine that wasn't from a Boeing 767 to fake evidence that a Boeing 767 crashed when they know people will take pictures of it and someone could just stand up and say that it couldn't be from that plane?

Isn't it more likely that this claim is nonsence, even if there was no plane?
Let's not jump the gun. Is the jet engine (part) of the wrong type, i.e. not an engine for a 767?
Anders Lindman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2011, 12:47 PM   #9
WilliamSeger
Philosopher
 
WilliamSeger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,092


It's a Pratt & Whitney JT9D-7R4D:



ETA: ... which is one of the standard 767 engines: http://www.tavansaz.com/JT9D_E.htm

Last edited by WilliamSeger; 7th May 2011 at 12:49 PM.
WilliamSeger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2011, 12:47 PM   #10
Anders Lindman
Penultimate Amazing
 
Anders Lindman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 13,833
Originally Posted by NoahFence View Post
So what's the suggestion? That a 767 hit the tower, but a 737 engine was planted 3 blocks away?
The suggestion is that I would like to see some debunking of the claim in the OP.
Anders Lindman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2011, 12:55 PM   #11
Edx
Philosopher
 
Edx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 5,642
Originally Posted by Anders Lindman View Post
The suggestion is that I would like to see some debunking of the claim in the OP.
Seems like someone did that already, so what now? Why did you already declare victory before you even bothered to check?
Edx is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2011, 12:57 PM   #12
Anders Lindman
Penultimate Amazing
 
Anders Lindman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 13,833
Originally Posted by WilliamSeger View Post
http://opendb.com/images/wtc_engine2.jpg

It's a Pratt & Whitney JT9D-7R4D:

http://opendb.com/images/wtc_engine3.jpg

ETA: ... which is one of the standard 767 engines: http://www.tavansaz.com/JT9D_E.htm
But this looks different:



From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ai...P%26W_JT9D.jpg
Anders Lindman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2011, 01:00 PM   #13
Anders Lindman
Penultimate Amazing
 
Anders Lindman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 13,833
Originally Posted by Edx View Post
Seems like someone did that already, so what now? Why did you already declare victory before you even bothered to check?
See my previous post.
Anders Lindman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2011, 01:01 PM   #14
leftysergeant
Penultimate Amazing
 
leftysergeant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 18,863
Rernse is not usually considered an authoritative source. They are not picky about facts over there. I have even seen "evidence" presented there to the effect that Auschwitz was not all that bad a place to sit out a world war.

The turd making that claim needs to offer some proof of who he is and where he works or we are all at liberty to dismiss him as an utter fraud, on a par with Bollyn and Hufschmid.
__________________
No civilization ever collapsed because the poor had too much to eat.
leftysergeant is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2011, 01:01 PM   #15
sadhatter
Philosopher
 
sadhatter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 8,694
Originally Posted by Edx View Post
So an unknown "airliner mechanic" says its not from a Boeing 767 posted on Rense of all places, and you think thats all you need?

Why do you have such low standards of evidence Anders?

My first question would be why do you think these conspirators would intentionally plant an engine that wasn't from a Boeing 767 in the streets in order to fake evidence that a Boeing 767 crashed .... especially when they know people will take pictures of it and then someone could just stand up and say that it couldn't be from that plane?

Isn't it more likely that this claim is nonsence, even if there was no plane?
If i ran an rpg game, and the villain did something so stupid, so idiotic , so obviously designed to be a clue to something, my players would leave because of the lack of realism that the villain is presenting. And this is an a narrative in which dragons, magic , and gods exist.

In the real world the thought that any person of average intellect, let alone the heads of a big evil corporation , would make such a stupid, obvious, mistake , is so silly it will spontaneously generate the benny hill theme.

Have fun with your three legged, one eyed, mange infested, malnourished, toothless paper tiger. Me i will stick to real issues instead of just inventing an easy villain to be the crummy Agent smith to my crummy neo.
sadhatter is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2011, 01:03 PM   #16
sadhatter
Philosopher
 
sadhatter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 8,694
Originally Posted by Anders Lindman View Post
The suggestion is that I would like to see some debunking of the claim in the OP.
In the nature of Ade Edmonson , walks over to the op, shrugs his shoulders and points " Ta da".
sadhatter is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2011, 01:07 PM   #17
Anders Lindman
Penultimate Amazing
 
Anders Lindman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 13,833
Originally Posted by leftysergeant View Post
Rernse is not usually considered an authoritative source. They are not picky about facts over there. I have even seen "evidence" presented there to the effect that Auschwitz was not all that bad a place to sit out a world war.

The turd making that claim needs to offer some proof of who he is and where he works or we are all at liberty to dismiss him as an utter fraud, on a par with Bollyn and Hufschmid.

I'm a bit doubtful about Rense.com as a source myself, but I would like to see evidence that proves the claim wrong.
Anders Lindman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2011, 01:12 PM   #18
WilliamSeger
Philosopher
 
WilliamSeger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,092
Originally Posted by Anders Lindman View Post
Nope, not different; just a different angle. The other photo shows fairly clearly the part found on Murray St.: the compressor and front of the combustor section. It's near the center of this diagram:

WilliamSeger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2011, 01:15 PM   #19
Dog Town
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,862
Originally Posted by Anders Lindman View Post

This time I will win.
Nope!


Dog Town is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2011, 01:15 PM   #20
lapman
Graduate Poster
 
lapman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,717
Originally Posted by Anders Lindman View Post
Wow, you should acually open your eyes when looking at a picture. Are you telling us that you don't know the difference between the outside and the inside of an engine? Yours is a cut away showing the internals while Williams show the external portions of the engine that matches the pic of the engine that was found at GZ.
__________________
They take their paranoia, mix in a healthy dose of mistrust in anything "gubmint", and then bake it in that big ole EZ Bake oven of ignorance, and come to the delusional conclusion that 9/11 was an inside job. - Seymour Butz
lapman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2011, 01:19 PM   #21
Myriad
The Clarity Is Devastating
 
Myriad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Betwixt
Posts: 18,658
This claim in a nutshell:

The engine found near Ground Zero was an all-busted-up engine. (Sorry for the technical language.)

Boeing 767s don't use all-busted-up engines. Their specifications call for not-even-slightly-busted-up engines.

Therefore, the engine found near Ground Zero could not have come from a 767.
__________________
A zÝmbie once bit my sister...
Myriad is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2011, 01:34 PM   #22
Anders Lindman
Penultimate Amazing
 
Anders Lindman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 13,833
Originally Posted by WilliamSeger View Post
Nope, not different; just a different angle. The other photo shows fairly clearly the part found on Murray St.: the compressor and front of the combustor section. It's near the center of this diagram:

http://www.aircraftenginedesign.com/pictures/JT9D.gif
Clearly? Not clear enough to me. What you posted here is more clear: http://www.internationalskeptics.com...93&postcount=9

Do you have any source for the photo of that engine?
Anders Lindman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2011, 01:38 PM   #23
lapman
Graduate Poster
 
lapman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,717
Originally Posted by Anders Lindman View Post
Clearly? Not clear enough to me. What you posted here is more clear: http://www.internationalskeptics.com...93&postcount=9

Do you have any source for the photo of that engine?
Of course it wouldn't be "clear enough" to you. It goes against your fantasy, so you immediately dismiss it.
__________________
They take their paranoia, mix in a healthy dose of mistrust in anything "gubmint", and then bake it in that big ole EZ Bake oven of ignorance, and come to the delusional conclusion that 9/11 was an inside job. - Seymour Butz
lapman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2011, 01:57 PM   #24
George 152
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,012
Small point. All LAMES have registration numbers.
Did this 'A&P mechanic' produce his number with the claims he made ?
George 152 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2011, 01:58 PM   #25
NoahFence
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 22,131
Originally Posted by Anders Lindman View Post
I'm going to go ahead and assume you're not an authority on aircraft engines.

NOW

In the "other" thread, you left us breathless with your ability to look at two different scenes of aircraft wreckage, and spot which was planted and which wasn't:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anders Lindman View Post
I found some strange things in the reported radar data. And how many radar stations have in fact produced any recorded radar data of the alleged second plane? Thousands of witnesses? I doubt it. The phone calls have been shown to be possibly fakes. Wreckage parts suspiciously looking as having been planted.
I ask again - how so?
NoahFence is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2011, 02:01 PM   #26
Anders Lindman
Penultimate Amazing
 
Anders Lindman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 13,833
Originally Posted by WilliamSeger View Post
http://opendb.com/images/wtc_engine2.jpg

It's a Pratt & Whitney JT9D-7R4D:

http://opendb.com/images/wtc_engine3.jpg

ETA: ... which is one of the standard 767 engines: http://www.tavansaz.com/JT9D_E.htm
"In fact all United Airline 767's were equiped with JT9D 7R4Ds."

"...this engine that is puported to have come from United Airlines Flight 175 on 9/11/01....

Has a cooling duct assembly that belongs to either a JT9D 7A or a JT9D 7F or a JT9D -7J"

From: http://www.airliners.net/aviation-fo...d.main/259303/

That means that the engine is NOT from a JT9D 7R4D.

More info:

"A175 is listed as:

B767-222 #N612UA B# 21873, PW JT9D-7R4D, Mode 3A 1470 > 3020 > 3321"

From: http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/i...#entry10747474
Anders Lindman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2011, 02:04 PM   #27
Anders Lindman
Penultimate Amazing
 
Anders Lindman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 13,833
Originally Posted by NoahFence View Post
I'm going to go ahead and assume you're not an authority on aircraft engines.

NOW

In the "other" thread, you left us breathless with your ability to look at two different scenes of aircraft wreckage, and spot which was planted and which wasn't:



I ask again - how so?
I have explained that in other threads. For example the jet engine part shoots out from the WTC tower with a bang indicating explosives used. But I want to first check if the jet engine is of the wrong type or not.

Last edited by Anders Lindman; 7th May 2011 at 02:08 PM.
Anders Lindman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2011, 02:08 PM   #28
NoahFence
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 22,131
Originally Posted by Anders Lindman View Post
I have explain that in other threads. For example the jet engine part shoots our from the WTC tower with a bang indicating explosives used. But I want to first check if the jet engine is of the wrong type or not.



You're implying theytm set off explosives at the moment of impact?
NoahFence is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2011, 02:10 PM   #29
Greedo
Too weird to live, too rare to die
 
Greedo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2,603
Originally Posted by Anders Lindman View Post
This time I will win.


Originally Posted by Edx View Post
So an unknown "airliner mechanic" says its not from a Boeing 767 posted on Rense of all places, and you think thats all you need?

Why do you have such low standards of evidence Anders?

My first question would be why do you think these conspirators would intentionally plant an engine that wasn't from a Boeing 767 in the streets in order to fake evidence that a Boeing 767 crashed .... especially when they know people will take pictures of it and then someone could just stand up and say that it couldn't be from that plane?

Isn't it more likely that this claim is nonsence, even if there was no plane?
^^This^^

Originally Posted by lapman View Post
Wow, you should acually open your eyes when looking at a picture. Are you telling us that you don't know the difference between the outside and the inside of an engine? Yours is a cut away showing the internals while Williams show the external portions of the engine that matches the pic of the engine that was found at GZ.
^^and this^^

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman View Post
Do you have any source for the photo of that engine?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Anders Lindman View Post
But this looks different:
What is it with you CTers and perspective?

Seriously. Too many airline mechanics would notice this. Not to mention all the other aviation nuts out there.

Okay, lets assume your CT is right, just for a second. Let's see how this went. Teh evul bosses order an engine to be placed near ground zero. Okay, for that they need an engine. They will ask someone who has an idea about aircraft engines (I don't assume teh evul NWO bosses have aircraft engines just lyin' around) "Hey, we need an engine for a 767." and the aircraft dude will say "No Problem, here is an engine for a 767 (hands engine over to evul bosses)." Or, as you suggested, he says: "Sorry, I only have an engine for a 737, will that do?" and teh evul bosses say "Yes! With this we can prove just how stupid and blind the sheeple are! Long live the NWO!"

So when did the NWO policy on leaving hints just because they can change from subliminal messages and symbols (wich really don't mean anything) to obvious mistakes wich really hundreds of thousands of people can immediately point to?

Or are you suggesting the NWO simply screwed up? Hmm, the evil conspirators that have been going on for decades and not screwed up once, now make this massive mistake? Seems unlikely.


Why would they need to place that engine there anyway? I assume you are a "no-planer". If so, please seek help.



Originally Posted by Anders Lindman View Post
This time I will win.
Oh, I almost forgot, you're just desperate to "defeat" "us".

Last edited by Greedo; 7th May 2011 at 02:16 PM.
Greedo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2011, 02:20 PM   #30
NoahFence
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 22,131
Quote:
Or are you suggesting the NWO simply screwed up? Hmm, the evil conspirators that have been going on for decades and not screwed up once, now make this massive mistake? Seems unlikely.
Hey, they told the BBC about Building 7, remember?
NoahFence is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2011, 02:23 PM   #31
sadhatter
Philosopher
 
sadhatter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 8,694
Any chance of addressing my point that this is such a stupid mistake, that it seems the Gov' would have had to be involved?
sadhatter is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2011, 02:25 PM   #32
Anders Lindman
Penultimate Amazing
 
Anders Lindman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 13,833
I found more interesting info (I hope it's not disinfo ):

"The name of the component is HPT Stage1 Cooling Duct Assembly. There is a history behind this assembly as I began to read more. This component was part of the early JT9D-7 series engines that were used in development of Boeing's 747 line of aircraft. The "7" series engines have gone through many revisions but are exclusively used on 747's. Many years later, P&W decided to work with NASA in the development in a new technology to improve engine performance and reliability. This improvement was made specifically to this section of engine. Tangential On-Board Injection (TOBI or "R" for Radial) was the newest improvement to reduce nozzle temperatures by over 2% which could open the door for a more powerful engines based on the "7" series engine. The new model of engine would be called 7R4+Revision Letter. The 7R4D engine is the one that is specified for United Airlines Boeing 767's.

The engine found at Church and Murray didn't seem to be a 7R4D.....it seemed to be a 7J. The only way to confirm this is to search for the engine and take a look at the diffuser casing to verify a match. This was another needle in a haystack but I found it......a photo of a stripped down 747 engine at an outdoor museum. The diffuser casing is a perfect match!

http://209.85.62.24/46/112/0/p173684...mparison04.jpg

http://209.85.62.24/46/112/0/p173685...parison_03.jpg

http://209.85.62.24/46/112/0/p173686...loy01_edit.jpg

http://209.85.62.24/46/112/0/p173687/_chromalloy02_edit.jpg"

From: http://s1.zetaboards.com/pumpitout/topic/1829738/1/
Anders Lindman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2011, 02:29 PM   #33
Anders Lindman
Penultimate Amazing
 
Anders Lindman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 13,833
Originally Posted by sadhatter View Post
Any chance of addressing my point that this is such a stupid mistake, that it seems the Gov' would have had to be involved?
What the Rense article said, that the engine was a CFM56, may be wrong. So it could be a JT9D, BUT perhaps not a JT9D-7R4D which was used in the UA Flight 175 767 airliner. See recent previous posts.
Anders Lindman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2011, 02:31 PM   #34
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 39,320
So I assume you will be reporting this discovery and your evidence to the FBI?
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2011, 02:32 PM   #35
Bell
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 21,050
Did someone bump this thread from 2006?
Bell is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2011, 02:36 PM   #36
Sword_Of_Truth
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 11,494
Originally Posted by Anders Lindman View Post
This time I will win.
Your acknowledgement that you have lost every other time is noted.
Sword_Of_Truth is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2011, 02:38 PM   #37
Anders Lindman
Penultimate Amazing
 
Anders Lindman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 13,833
Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop View Post
So I assume you will be reporting this discovery and your evidence to the FBI?
I'm not an expert, so I can't tell if the claims are correct. For example, this part is claimed to NOT be from the exact type of engine in Flight 175: http://209.85.62.24/46/112/0/p173685...parison_03.jpg

It would be VERY interesting if that claim is correct.
Anders Lindman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2011, 02:40 PM   #38
Anders Lindman
Penultimate Amazing
 
Anders Lindman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 13,833
Originally Posted by Sword_Of_Truth View Post
Your acknowledgement that you have lost every other time is noted.
If I say: this time I will win, then it means that I may have won previously too! So your claim is false.
Anders Lindman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2011, 02:46 PM   #39
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,734
Let's see if I got this.

Anders Lindman post something (anything) and people respond. Has he ever posted anything that even remotely required a response (that has not been done hundreds of times)?

<looks at ignore list, evaluates the names (4) on that list, decides NOT to change criteria for adding names>

__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2011, 02:47 PM   #40
Anders Lindman
Penultimate Amazing
 
Anders Lindman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 13,833
Originally Posted by lapman View Post
Wow, you should acually open your eyes when looking at a picture. Are you telling us that you don't know the difference between the outside and the inside of an engine? Yours is a cut away showing the internals while Williams show the external portions of the engine that matches the pic of the engine that was found at GZ.
Yeah, it could be a JT9D, BUT maybe not a JT9D-7R4D, which is a crucial distinction. One possibility is that if it was planted, then they only managed to get hold of an older type of that engine as suggested by some researchers (see posts above).
Anders Lindman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:46 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.