ISF Logo   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.
Tags flight 175

Reply
Old 1st July 2017, 04:34 PM   #1
MattNelson
New Blood
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 5
Flight 175 Engine Theories Silenced

Hello. For my first post, void of links, a lesson for victims of Pilots for 9/11 Truth's video "9/11: Identify," specifically the portion on YouTube with ID# PhqZQqQdjyk titled "Murray Street Engine." You'll see my comments there. I'm CTV911. I plan to participate in a thread created here some time ago with the title of my free 244-page (60MB PDF) e-book "9/11 Debris: An Investigation of Ground Zero," which has a chapter section on the engines found.

In summary, the Flight 175 "wrong engine theory" as I call it (launched by Darren aka Weezula on pumpitout forum thread "Church & Murray Street Engine IDENTIFIED!" in 2009) says it could not have been a Boeing 767's engine because the TOBI duct assembly seen in photos and video was not used on Boeing 767s. The specific engine model, Pratt & Whitney JT9D-7R4D was not listed on TOBI duct part manufacturer Chromalloy's catalog specs; and that was the proof.

Funny, the theory speculated the engine was from a 747, all of which have 4 engines. Apparently the 767 was outfitted with two 747 engines to fly faster!(?) That is, since the video doesn't suggest the engine was planted there with dry ice as fake smoke! (Seriously, I've heard that from no-planers.)

To silence this theory, I contacted a plane engine mechanic, Fred Robel on Google+, and asked for photos of the TOBI duct in a Pratt JT9D-7R4D. I was answered. A quick search can find it, or click the link in the comments I posted on YouTube.

The end. Silence.

While researching this subject, I managed to identify one of the engine parts currently on display in the Washington D.C. Newseum as coming from American Flight 11, not United 175 as the museum's signs say (and as the FBI's website says about the exhibit "Inside Today's FBI"). I wrote an article on my blog at 911conspiracy.wordpress.com and made a couple videos about it. "Flight 11 Plane Engine Identified 2016..." is the shorter of the two. I was surprised the FBI didn't know, since they had help from the NTSB.

The American 767 had GE engines, so it was quite simple to identify. No serial numbers were matched to aircraft registration, so this isn't an absolute proof of Flight 11 to the misled truthers. But then, what would be?
MattNelson 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 1st July 2017, 05:00 PM   #2
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 14,627
Hi MattNelson, and welcome to this obscure place!
Your name somehow rings a bell to me ... ah yes, your PDF book, I think I still have it on my hard drive somewhere

Anyway, here are your links:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PhqZQqQdjyk
YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE


Your comments appear to have been deleted!?

I spot two of your own videos on the topic though:
9/11 Flight 11 Engine Identified 2016 - FBI Failed (2016/09/09)
9/11 Flight 11 Plane Engine IDENTIFIED 2016 - NOT Flight 175! (2016/09/10)
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
Oystein 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 1st July 2017, 06:47 PM   #3
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 24,764
Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
...
The American 767 had GE engines, so it was quite simple to identify. No serial numbers were matched to aircraft registration, so this isn't an absolute proof of Flight 11 to the misled truthers. But then, what would be?
Radar proves Flight 11 and 175 hit the Towers...
you are correct, 9/11 truth paranoid failed cult members ignore evidence.
__________________
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen" - Albert Einstein
"... education as the means of developing our greatest abilities" - JFK
https://folding.stanford.edu/ fold with your computer - join team 13232
beachnut 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 2nd July 2017, 12:31 PM   #4
MattNelson
New Blood
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 5
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
Your comments appear to have been deleted!?
Aha. The comments are "spam" since they contain links; and only I can see them (when logged in.) That is, unless they are approved in the uploader's video manager. When he views the video, a graphic atop the comments section will say there are comments awaiting approval.
MattNelson 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 2nd July 2017, 01:31 PM   #5
MattNelson
New Blood
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 5
Originally Posted by beachnut View Post
Radar proves Flight 11 and 175 hit the Towers...
you are correct, 9/11 truth paranoid failed cult members ignore evidence.
I've done some reading here and just had the funny thought:

It's like you're playing Whack-a-Mole and that statement is your hammer!
MattNelson 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 2nd July 2017, 01:58 PM   #6
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 14,627
Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
I've done some reading here and just had the funny thought:

It's like you're playing Whack-a-Mole and that statement is your hammer!
We've had oh so many moles, they are a plague
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
Oystein 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 4th July 2017, 08:13 AM   #7
Wolrab
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,021
Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
I've done some reading here and just had the funny thought:

It's like you're playing Whack-a-Mole and that statement is your hammer A-10 Warthog!
FTFY!
__________________
"Such reports are usually based on the sighting of something the sighters cannot explain and that they (or someone else on their behalf) explain as representing an interstellar spaceship-often by saying "But what else can it be?" as though thier own ignorance is a decisive factor." Isaac Asimov
Wolrab 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 6th July 2017, 06:17 AM   #8
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 10,106
Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
Hello. For my first post, void of links, a lesson for victims of Pilots for 9/11 Truth's video "9/11: Identify," specifically the portion on YouTube with ID# PhqZQqQdjyk titled "Murray Street Engine." You'll see my comments there. I'm CTV911. I plan to participate in a thread created here some time ago with the title of my free 244-page (60MB PDF) e-book "9/11 Debris: An Investigation of Ground Zero," which has a chapter section on the engines found.

In summary, the Flight 175 "wrong engine theory" as I call it (launched by Darren aka Weezula on pumpitout forum thread "Church & Murray Street Engine IDENTIFIED!" in 2009) says it could not have been a Boeing 767's engine because the TOBI duct assembly seen in photos and video was not used on Boeing 767s. The specific engine model, Pratt & Whitney JT9D-7R4D was not listed on TOBI duct part manufacturer Chromalloy's catalog specs; and that was the proof.

Funny, the theory speculated the engine was from a 747, all of which have 4 engines. Apparently the 767 was outfitted with two 747 engines to fly faster!(?) That is, since the video doesn't suggest the engine was planted there with dry ice as fake smoke! (Seriously, I've heard that from no-planers.)

To silence this theory, I contacted a plane engine mechanic, Fred Robel on Google+, and asked for photos of the TOBI duct in a Pratt JT9D-7R4D. I was answered. A quick search can find it, or click the link in the comments I posted on YouTube.

The end. Silence.

While researching this subject, I managed to identify one of the engine parts currently on display in the Washington D.C. Newseum as coming from American Flight 11, not United 175 as the museum's signs say (and as the FBI's website says about the exhibit "Inside Today's FBI"). I wrote an article on my blog at 911conspiracy.wordpress.com and made a couple videos about it. "Flight 11 Plane Engine Identified 2016..." is the shorter of the two. I was surprised the FBI didn't know, since they had help from the NTSB.

The American 767 had GE engines, so it was quite simple to identify. No serial numbers were matched to aircraft registration, so this isn't an absolute proof of Flight 11 to the misled truthers. But then, what would be?
9/11 Ctist's generally are adverse to any type of facts, but I applaud you for bring this to the table.
__________________
"An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it." - Col. Jeff Cooper, U.S.M.C.

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong 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 6th July 2017, 12:16 PM   #9
MattNelson
New Blood
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 5
Anthony Lawson serving a dish of the wrong engine theory in 2011:
youtube.com/watch?v=wF-Rp4W_ABE
"The Legend of 911 — 10 Years On"
No comments allowed, but another of his videos has the same theory presented:
youtube.com/watch?v=vfz6H-y5zbM
"The Legend of 911 — 13 Years On"
Comments welcome. Thanks all.
MattNelson 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 6th July 2017, 10:00 PM   #10
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 24,764
Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
Anthony Lawson serving a dish of the wrong engine theory in 2011:
youtube.com/watch?v=wF-Rp4W_ABE
"The Legend of 911 10 Years On"
No comments allowed, but another of his videos has the same theory presented:
youtube.com/watch?v=vfz6H-y5zbM
"The Legend of 911 13 Years On"
Comments welcome. Thanks all.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vfz6H-y5zbM

That was BS, the 9/11 Commission does not do woo on building construction. The idiot complains that the 9/11 commission failed to study the building, or some fantasy, and offers nothing but talk.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wF-Rp4W_ABE
The lie of the unidentified planes, tracked from takeoff to impact by Radar, proof it was 11, 175, 77 and 93; big fail for someone who is undefined stupid.

The idiot has no clue 19 terrorists did 9/11.
__________________
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen" - Albert Einstein
"... education as the means of developing our greatest abilities" - JFK
https://folding.stanford.edu/ fold with your computer - join team 13232
beachnut 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 6th July 2017, 11:06 PM   #11
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 15,979
Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
Anthony Lawson serving a dish of the wrong engine theory in 2011:
youtube.com/watch?v=wF-Rp4W_ABE
"The Legend of 911 10 Years On"
No comments allowed, but another of his videos has the same theory presented:
youtube.com/watch?v=vfz6H-y5zbM
"The Legend of 911 13 Years On"
Comments welcome. Thanks all.
Some internet wingnut actually took the trouble to match the engine to the aircraft years ago. Right down to it's component parts. Now there was extreme plane spotting. I would have to go look it up, but the guy tossed in the engineering diagrams and everything proving beyond a doubt the the engine came from that plane.

And the hoaxies response? Teams of agents placed the engine there off the bed of a flatbed truck. Why? Because.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?
abaddon 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 12th July 2017, 02:24 PM   #12
Klimax
NWO Cyborg 5960x (subversion VPUNPCKHQDQ)
 
Klimax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Starship Wanderer - DS9
Posts: 11,503
Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
Aha. The comments are "spam" since they contain links; and only I can see them (when logged in.) That is, unless they are approved in the uploader's video manager. When he views the video, a graphic atop the comments section will say there are comments awaiting approval.
Quick note: Comments marked as spam cannot be approved by video uploader. (At least I haven't found a way)
__________________
ModBorg

Engine: Ibalgin 400
Klimax is online now   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 13th July 2017, 11:52 AM   #13
skyeagle409
Master Poster
 
skyeagle409's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,191
Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
In summary, the Flight 175 "wrong engine theory" as I call it (launched by Darren aka Weezula on pumpitout forum thread "Church & Murray Street Engine IDENTIFIED!" in 2009) says it could not have been a Boeing 767's engine because the TOBI duct assembly seen in photos and video was not used on Boeing 767s. The specific engine model, Pratt & Whitney JT9D-7R4D was not listed on TOBI duct part manufacturer Chromalloy's catalog specs; and that was the proof.

Funny, the theory speculated the engine was from a 747, all of which have 4 engines. Apparently the 767 was outfitted with two 747 engines to fly faster!(?) That is, since the video doesn't suggest the engine was planted there with dry ice as fake smoke! (Seriously, I've heard that from no-planers.)

I never could understand why anyone would believe the engine in question was planted in front of hundreds of people after many witnesses saw two B-767's strike the WTC Towers. Is that another example of certain people planting disinformation in order to discredit the truth movement?

Like planting turboprop engines in front of hundreds of people at the crash site of a B-747 in order to convince those people the B-747 was really a C-130. It just does not make any sense whatsoever!
skyeagle409 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 17th July 2017, 01:57 PM   #14
JSanderO
Master Poster
 
JSanderO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: nyc
Posts: 2,678
how do you plant a jet engine anyway?
__________________
So many idiots and so little time.
JSanderO 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 17th July 2017, 02:56 PM   #15
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 24,764
Originally Posted by JSanderO View Post
how do you plant a jet engine anyway?
Dig a hole 50 percent wider and deeper than the jet engine. Fill with potting soil mixed with existing soil to cover engine with 3 to 6 inches of soil; water daily until first growth appears. Then: GE engines require water once a week, RR engines once a month.
__________________
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen" - Albert Einstein
"... education as the means of developing our greatest abilities" - JFK
https://folding.stanford.edu/ fold with your computer - join team 13232
beachnut 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 17th July 2017, 07:26 PM   #16
AJM8125
Potsing Whiled Runk
Tagger
 
AJM8125's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 19,399
Originally Posted by beachnut View Post
Dig a hole 50 percent wider and deeper than the jet engine. Fill with potting soil mixed with existing soil to cover engine with 3 to 6 inches of soil; water daily until first growth appears. Then: GE engines require water once a week, RR engines once a month.
Stand clear when it begins to thrust through the potting soil.
__________________
AJM8125 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 August 2017, 03:04 PM   #17
MattNelson
New Blood
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 5
Balsamo deleted all comments refuting his theory. Ha.
So I commented again.
youtube.com/watch?v=PhqZQqQdjyk
MattNelson 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 10th August 2017, 05:52 PM   #18
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
 
jaydeehess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,793
Originally Posted by JSanderO View Post
how do you plant a jet engine anyway?
You say" hey everyone look up there" then you take a wrecked engine of the wrong type, in the middle of the street.

easy-peasy. Just like lamp poles at the Pentagon.
jaydeehess 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 11th August 2017, 12:55 AM   #19
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 24,389
"Dudes, look! It's the Goodyear Blimp!"

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers 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 11th August 2017, 10:24 AM   #20
Hellbound
Merchant of Doom
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Somewhere between the central U.S. and Hades
Posts: 11,240
Nanotech, man. They had nannites programmed to build a fake engine part at the molecular level.

I know it's possible, I saw it on Star Trek.

Brb, gotta go get more Chee-Tohs
Hellbound 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 11th August 2017, 02:20 PM   #21
Redwood
Graduate Poster
 
Redwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,469
Originally Posted by Hellbound View Post
Nanotech, man. They had nannites programmed to build a fake engine part at the molecular level.

I know it's possible, I saw it on Star Trek.

Brb, gotta go get more Chee-Tohs
Just be sure to keep them happy. Wouldn't want a wildcat strike at a critical moment.
YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
Redwood 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 09:01 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
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.