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.
Reply
Old 15th April 2017, 02:52 AM   #161
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 14,859
Originally Posted by Childlike Empress View Post
Which isn't the case here. There neither is a plane nor an image of a plane. The only act of surrealism is the capability of people to see something that isn't there.
Remember, CE: You are still on the run from my previous posts here. You surely have not forgotten that the same images that show no plane also show no office, office supplies, office furniture, office equipment or office workers, so by the exact same logic, there weren't any offices in the Pentagon before the 9/11 incident.

Everybody here knows why you run away from this. You realise with great precision that you cannot defend your silly, stupid, false logic.
__________________
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 15th April 2017, 03:25 AM   #162
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 14,859
Originally Posted by dropzone View Post
...
Gedanken Experiment: Look at those photos. Conjure in your brain the number of people involved in fabricating this very public fraud. Add in the so-called witnesses. Add in the people there you can't see because they aren't in the photos. This is your denominator. Your numerator is the number of people willing to sing like little birdies when the Enquirer flashed $5g under their noses. The solution is what, 1/50? Raise the incentive to $10k. What happens to the solution? It nears one, but this is the story of the century, so keep raising that incentive. As it grows the likelihood that one canary sings closes on certainty, but has it happened? No.
...
Add to this the large number of 9/11 Truthers suspected by other 9/11 Truthers to be planted government disinfo agents! (Ranke and Marquis were great at spotting shills amongst their own.)
__________________
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 15th April 2017, 04:24 AM   #163
Reheat
Illuminator
 
Reheat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: In Space
Posts: 3,493
Originally Posted by Childlike Empress View Post
While we're at intentional deception: The link to your clownish "debunking" piece is broken.
In the 10 years or so since that analysis no one has been able to refute it. There may be some small measurement errors that were done manually, but they will not make a hill of beans difference in the calculations and final conclusion.

You says it's BS without stating reasons why. Ranke and Alpo did the same thing, because it destroyed all their invented flight paths. All it does, in addition to all of the other evidence is destroy the delusion, once and for all.

One would think that in 10 years an aeronautical engineer would have said, hey this is "out to lunch", but that hasn't happened. ALL of those turning flight paths are simply impossible and this analysis is proof. There are no major errors that would make a difference.

Ranke, Alpo, and you have no clue about Airliner performance and capabilities. This was very evident when the CIT goof balls were simply drawing lines on a map and saying this is the flight path. That was until Beachnut and I took a look one day and realized the ignorant drawings were beyond the capabilities of ANY transport certified aircraft.

In fact, all fighters could not fly some portions of the flight paths at reasonable airspeeds either. Yes, that how bad it is. One look at that chart and it's more than obvious to a normal person with a brain. Get a grip and stop embarrassing yourself with this nonsense.
__________________
[Noc]
Reheat 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 15th April 2017, 05:27 AM   #164
Childlike Empress
Ewige Blumenkraft
 
Childlike Empress's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ivory Tower
Posts: 14,561
Originally Posted by Reheat View Post
In the 10 years or so since that analysis no one has been able to refute it. There may be some small measurement errors that were done manually, but they will not make a hill of beans difference in the calculations and final conclusion.

You says it's BS without stating reasons why. Ranke and Alpo did the same thing, because it destroyed all their invented flight paths. All it does, in addition to all of the other evidence is destroy the delusion, once and for all.

One would think that in 10 years an aeronautical engineer would have said, hey this is "out to lunch", but that hasn't happened. ALL of those turning flight paths are simply impossible and this analysis is proof. There are no major errors that would make a difference.

Ranke, Alpo, and you have no clue about Airliner performance and capabilities. This was very evident when the CIT goof balls were simply drawing lines on a map and saying this is the flight path. That was until Beachnut and I took a look one day and realized the ignorant drawings were beyond the capabilities of ANY transport certified aircraft.

In fact, all fighters could not fly some portions of the flight paths at reasonable airspeeds either. Yes, that how bad it is. One look at that chart and it's more than obvious to a normal person with a brain. Get a grip and stop embarrassing yourself with this nonsense.

In fact, Reheat has been called out on it immediately after he came up with the little deception, and over and over again, reacting with nothing but the charming abuse attempts we know so well from the "debunker" crowd. I'll give interested readers the time to catch up before I spoil the fun. Happy Easter!
__________________
De-Putin-Nazify America!
...progress updates [1] [2] [3]...
Childlike Empress 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 15th April 2017, 05:48 AM   #165
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 14,859
"Yeah runnin' down a dream
That never would come to me
Workin' on a mystery,
goin' wherever it leads
Runnin' down a dream
"
*humming guitar riff*
__________________
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 15th April 2017, 05:48 AM   #166
Reheat
Illuminator
 
Reheat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: In Space
Posts: 3,493
Originally Posted by Childlike Empress View Post
In fact, Reheat has been called out on it immediately after he came up with the little deception, and over and over again, reacting with nothing but the charming abuse attempts we know so well from the "debunker" crowd. I'll give interested readers the time to catch up before I spoil the fun. Happy Easter!
I've been waiting for 10 years. What's the secret? The obvious conclusion is that there is nothing to refute the math and the conclusions. Stop pretending there is. It is quite obvious by now that all that can be said it that it's BS.

I'm waiting, but not holding my breath.
__________________
[Noc]
Reheat 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 15th April 2017, 05:56 AM   #167
dropzone
Graduate Poster
 
dropzone's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,998
CE, there are two trails of breadcrumbs to follow. One is easy, as there are actual breadcrumbs. The other is hard because you have to interpret every flash of white as a breadcrumb, whether or not it was real. Then you have to convince the rest of us it wasn't a cosmic ray passing through your visual cortex because, frankly, we don't see it. What we see is an airliner-shaped hole in a building surrounded, at both ends, by recognizable airliner parts, the breadcrumbs. What the hell do you see? And what led you to that nonsensical conclusion?
dropzone 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 15th April 2017, 08:48 AM   #168
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 24,791
Originally Posted by Childlike Empress View Post
In fact, Reheat has been called out on it immediately after he came up with the little deception, and over and over again, reacting with nothing but the charming abuse attempts we know so well from the "debunker" crowd. I'll give interested readers the time to catch up before I spoil the fun. Happy Easter!
In fact? Got some evidence?

Yes, an idiot argued 77 did not hit the Pentagon - a "call out"? More like an insane person unable to grasp reality. Was it Balsamo's sockpuppet. Poor Balsamo never got an ATP, never flew left seat heavies.
__________________
"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 15th April 2017, 12:16 PM   #169
skyeagle409
Master Poster
 
skyeagle409's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,238
Originally Posted by Childlike Empress View Post
In fact, Reheat has been called out on it immediately after he came up with the little deception, and over and over again, reacting with nothing but the charming abuse attempts we know so well from the "debunker" crowd. I'll give interested readers the time to catch up before I spoil the fun. Happy Easter!

I hope that you don't seriously take what CIT has posted about American 77. For an example, did you know that CIT has deliberately posted false information regarding American 77 and that their deception routine has been used to discredit the truth movement?
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 15th April 2017, 01:00 PM   #170
Criteria
Critical Thinker
 
Criteria's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 449
Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
”So you believe the recorded testimonies of 10 eyewitnesses, including two D.C. police officers, were fakery?”
Originally Posted by Gamolon View Post
So you believe the testimonies of some of those witnesses when they state they saw the plane impact the Pentagon?
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
What is the reason their testimony should not be believed?

Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk
I see no motivation for two law enforcement professionals to lie about their view of such a low flying plane, highlighted by the Pentagon explosion seconds later.

Such contradictions justify an investigation.

On the world stage, the military efforts by the spawn of 9/11 to make America great again might soon make all the topics in this forum ‘moot’.
Criteria 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 15th April 2017, 01:28 PM   #171
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 24,791
Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
I see no motivation for two law enforcement professionals to lie about their view of such a low flying plane, highlighted by the Pentagon explosion seconds later.

Such contradictions justify an investigation.

On the world stage, the military efforts by the spawn of 9/11 to make America great again might soon make all the topics in this forum ‘moot’.
The testimony of all the witnesses are part of the "official" story, and the already done one and only biggest investigation in history. The only people who need a new investigation are paranoid conspiracy theorists who fail to grasp reality.

The explosion was from a kinetic energy impact of Flight 77, not explosives.
The witnesses can't beat the FDR, Radar and DNA - if you think their statements support some insane claims like CIT had.

Wrong, the false claims and lies from 9/11 truth were moot, wait, they were lies and BS out of the box.



I was laughing as CIT witnesses pointed to the exact direction Flight 77 flew - why can't you figure out the simple stuff, the lies of 9/11 truth. There are limitation human perceptions and memory have, and the witnesses statements don't trump lampposts knocked down, DNA, FDR, and Radar. My favorite error by CIT supporters is the use of "over". Over is not directly over... when we go to the field in an aircraft accident in the USAF, on planes which had no FDR, we would use a yard stick to help witnesses aim to location, not a video of them waving their arms all over.

What is your Flight 77 fantasy story? Why can't you explain your theory?


On the world stage 9/11 truth is a failed movement based on the ignorance of the followers. Sadly, it appears to be like JFK CTs, never ending woo as new paranoid CTers adopt lies and expose their ignorance.
__________________
"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

Last edited by beachnut; 15th April 2017 at 01:37 PM.
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 15th April 2017, 02:30 PM   #172
skyeagle409
Master Poster
 
skyeagle409's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,238
Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
I see no motivation for two law enforcement professionals to lie about their view of such a low flying plane, highlighted by the Pentagon explosion seconds later.

There was never a doubt that American 77 flew very low before striking the Pentagon. American 77 was tracked on radar to the location of the Pentagon and nowhere else.


Quote:
Such contradictions justify an investigation.

No, it doesn't because facts and physical evidence were used to support the fact that American 77 flew south of the gas station before striking the Pentagon. Did truthers bother to ask American Airlines what happened to American 77?

.

Last edited by skyeagle409; 15th April 2017 at 02:35 PM.
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 15th April 2017, 02:39 PM   #173
skyeagle409
Master Poster
 
skyeagle409's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,238
Originally Posted by beachnut View Post
In fact? Got some evidence?
Was it Balsamo's sockpuppet. Poor Balsamo never got an ATP, never flew left seat heavies.

I was amazed how easy Balsamo was able to dupe truthers with false information time and time again. I doubted that he was a real pilot because what he was posting I knew as a pilot of well over 40 years, that he was posting was false and misleading information. However, someone later posted to me that he was a pilot. Anyway, another two years and I will hit the magic 50-year mark as a pilot.

Last edited by skyeagle409; 15th April 2017 at 02:43 PM.
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 15th April 2017, 04:15 PM   #174
BasqueArch
Graduate Poster
 
BasqueArch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,858
Originally Posted by Childlike Empress View Post
In fact, Reheat has been called out on it immediately after he came up with the little deception, and over and over again, reacting with nothing but the charming abuse attempts we know so well from the "debunker" crowd. I'll give interested readers the time to catch up before I spoil the fun. Happy Easter!
All the north and south witnesses agree, the plane hit the Pentagon.
All the north and south witnesses agree, the plane did not fly over the Pentagon.
All the rationals agree, no-planers are nuts.
__________________
In Your Guts You Know They're Nuts. "There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true." -Kierkegaard . "The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. "- Marcus Aurelius
A Truther is a True Believer convinced by lies. You can't reason someone out of a thing they weren't reasoned into.There's a sucker born every minute-Barnum

Last edited by BasqueArch; 15th April 2017 at 04:18 PM.
BasqueArch 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 15th April 2017, 04:18 PM   #175
Axxman300
Master Poster
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 2,013
Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
I see no motivation for two law enforcement professionals to lie about their view of such a low flying plane, highlighted by the Pentagon explosion seconds later.

Such contradictions justify an investigation.
No.

It was investigated. My favorite eye-witness was the custodian working on an antenna on the Naval Annex roof who was almost struck by AA77. The plane tore the top half of the antenna off.

It happened just the way every normal person says it did.

Quote:
On the world stage, the military efforts by the spawn of 9/11 to make America great again might soon make all the topics in this forum ‘moot’.
That's what happens when you give Conspiracy Theorists power, and the power core of the new White House are hardcore CTists. It's your world now.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 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 15th April 2017, 04:54 PM   #176
Reheat
Illuminator
 
Reheat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: In Space
Posts: 3,493
Originally Posted by Childlike Empress View Post
In fact, Reheat has been called out on it immediately after he came up with the little deception, and over and over again, reacting with nothing but the charming abuse attempts we know so well from the "debunker" crowd. I'll give interested readers the time to catch up before I spoil the fun. Happy Easter!
Hay, CE. I just found the thread which you may be referring to. It was started by the Lone Bedouin, who I suspect was a Ranke sock.

He objected to my paper using Morin as a witness for the flight paths. The problem is that Morin was touted as one of the best CIT witnesses due to his aviation background (helicopter I think). That was until it was discovered he made your whole charade fall apart. In other words let's drop those who don't support the CT, but keep the others. I think this is a good idea. Actually, the witnesses who said that AA77 hit the Pentagon are the most unreliable from your POV. Use all of the others, but drop those who disagree with your CT about a flyover. How's that for a good deal. Now see, I'm not such a bad guy after all.

__________________
[Noc]

Last edited by Reheat; 15th April 2017 at 04:55 PM.
Reheat 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 15th April 2017, 05:14 PM   #177
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 14,859
Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
I see no motivation for two law enforcement professionals to lie about their view of such a low flying plane, highlighted by the Pentagon explosion seconds later.
...
I have two straight questions for you - simple yes/no questions. You know the routine: I am asking for your simple, straight and honest answer. You know of course that I fully expect you to run far and hide under a rock rather than give me a simple, straight and honest answer, but hey, that's the fun here.

So here are my questions.

A) The same two law enforcement professionals reported that they saw the plane crash into the Pentagon. Do you see any motivation for the two law enforcement professionals to lie about where they saw the plane last?

B) Is it possible that these two law enforcement professionals simply erred about the flight path, perhaps because they are mere mortal humans?

Remember, these are yes/no question.
I will help you, as usual and give away the correct answers. You may copy and paste them:

A) No
B) Yes

(I wish someone would bet 10,000 dollars that Criteria will give two simple, straight and honest yes/no answers in one of his next 3 posts - I could use some cash)
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)

Last edited by Oystein; 15th April 2017 at 05:15 PM.
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 15th April 2017, 06:17 PM   #178
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
 
jaydeehess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,808
Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
I see no motivation for two law enforcement professionals to lie about their view of such a low flying plane, highlighted by the Pentagon explosion seconds later.

Such contradictions justify an investigation.

On the world stage, the military efforts by the spawn of 9/11 to make America great again might soon make all the topics in this forum ‘moot’.
But you believe they had reason to lie about impact with the Pentagon, right?

Oops, what Oystein said.

Last edited by jaydeehess; 15th April 2017 at 06:19 PM.
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 15th April 2017, 06:26 PM   #179
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
 
jaydeehess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,808
Originally Posted by Reheat View Post
Hay, CE. I just found the thread which you may be referring to. It was started by the Lone Bedouin, who I suspect was a Ranke sock.

He objected to my paper using Morin as a witness for the flight paths. The problem is that Morin was touted as one of the best CIT witnesses due to his aviation background (helicopter I think). That was until it was discovered he made your whole charade fall apart. In other words let's drop those who don't support the CT, but keep the others. I think this is a good idea. Actually, the witnesses who said that AA77 hit the Pentagon are the most unreliable from your POV. Use all of the others, but drop those who disagree with your CT about a flyover. How's that for a good deal. Now see, I'm not such a bad guy after all.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...1f10359a41.gif
In Balsamo'S animation of what he claims Morin said, Morin would have to have done a 180 to see the aircraft.
Morin ran out between the annex sections and reports seeing the tail section until impact. IF there were a flyover, he would have been in a perfect position to see it.

The City can also not bother using Boger as he says he watched the plane from first appearance at the top of the hill until it impacted the Pentagon.

Said it before, I'll say it again; the City would be better off claiming a magical fly UNDER.
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 15th April 2017, 06:30 PM   #180
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
 
jaydeehess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,808
Originally Posted by skyeagle409 View Post
I wonder how these B-757 flaps got on the grounds of the Pentagon.

http://www.voicesofsafety.com/pogone...icle-pic-1.jpg
Seecrit eh-gent vans
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 15th April 2017, 06:57 PM   #181
skyeagle409
Master Poster
 
skyeagle409's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,238
Originally Posted by jaydeehess View Post
Seecrit eh-gent vans
I got it now.

The black ops folks are secretly planting wreckage of flaps, fuselage, landing gears, wheels, blown tires, and engine wreckage while other black ops folks were secretly pulling down those light poles when everyone was focused on the impact hole that never was because American 77 didn't crash into the Pentagon, it secretly landed at a busy airport under the watchful eyes of air traffic controllers and radar operators while cutting off airliners on final approach and hoping that no one would notice.

Afterward, they called American Airlines that American 77 crashed at the Pentagon which is why American Airlines reported that American 77 crashed at the Pentagon. While all of that was going on, other black ops folks were secretly manipulating radar data in order to make it look like American 77 passed north of the gas station so they could create a conspiracy theory by pulling down light poles to make it look like American 77 passed south of the gas station.

Sometimes, I just don't know whatever comes over me when I doubt a truther.

.

Last edited by skyeagle409; 15th April 2017 at 07:01 PM.
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 15th April 2017, 07:10 PM   #182
NoahFence
Psycho Kitty
 
NoahFence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 20,915
Are we really still talking about no planes?
Only certifiable retards think there were no planes involved in the crime scenes on 9-11.

Period.
__________________
you to the ignorant, uneducated portion ofAmerica too short sighted to see what's right in front of your cheeto loving faces.
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 15th April 2017, 07:19 PM   #183
pgimeno
Illuminator
 
pgimeno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,249
Wasn't it that the plane which flew over, also dropped the pieces?

Man, it's hard to keep up
__________________
Ask questions. Demand answers. But be prepared to accept the answers, or don't ask questions in the first place.
pgimeno 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 16th April 2017, 05:08 AM   #184
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 14,859
Originally Posted by NoahFence View Post
Are we really still talking about no planes?
Only certifiable retards think there were no planes involved in the crime scenes on 9-11.

Period.
My experience can't be representative, but my perception is that no-planers are a larger proportion of trutherdom than ever before. I think only a minority of Truthers nowaday does not believe in one of the craziest of the crazy ideas: no-planes, nukes, DEW - no-planes being the biggest fad among those.
Those whose ideas are only moderately crazy (such as LIHOP, explosive demolition) seem often motivated by paleo-antisemitism.
(These labels of course apply to overlapping groups)
__________________
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 16th April 2017, 05:15 AM   #185
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 14,859
Originally Posted by skyeagle409 View Post
I got it now.

The black ops folks are secretly planting wreckage of flaps, fuselage, landing gears, wheels, blown tires, and engine wreckage while other black ops folks were secretly pulling down those light poles when everyone was focused on the impact hole that never was because American 77 didn't crash into the Pentagon, it secretly landed at a busy airport under the watchful eyes of air traffic controllers and radar operators while cutting off airliners on final approach and hoping that no one would notice.

Afterward, they called American Airlines that American 77 crashed at the Pentagon which is why American Airlines reported that American 77 crashed at the Pentagon. While all of that was going on, other black ops folks were secretly manipulating radar data in order to make it look like American 77 passed north of the gas station so they could create a conspiracy theory by pulling down light poles to make it look like American 77 passed south of the gas station.

Sometimes, I just don't know whatever comes over me when I doubt a truther.

.
You've got that right - black ops teams were out in large masses everywhere.
And they still are: All debunkers are probably black-ops, as are the majority of truthers - all those who sing the confessional of any of the other denominations of Trutherdom.

I recently saw Dan Noel, AE911Truth's man for presenter teams, opine that most architects and engineers in the entire world as well as most governments and government agencies worldwide are part of the superbig conspiracy.
He is boldly leading the Truth Movement to its final destination, which has been prophesized years ago - not by them but by heretic guru RMackey: The inflationary limit of all CTs where the entire world is part of the Conspiracy.
__________________
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 16th April 2017, 06:36 AM   #186
cantonear1968
Graduate Poster
 
cantonear1968's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,605
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
My experience can't be representative, but my perception is that no-planers are a larger proportion of trutherdom than ever before. I think only a minority of Truthers nowaday does not believe in one of the craziest of the crazy ideas: no-planes, nukes, DEW - no-planes being the biggest fad among those.
Those whose ideas are only moderately crazy (such as LIHOP, explosive demolition) seem often motivated by paleo-antisemitism.
(These labels of course apply to overlapping groups)
When you say this are you referring to NPs at all 4 locations or a subset of Pentagon and/or Shanksville? Meaning zero planes were used on 9/11 or they accept the WTC impacts but not at the other locations.

I actually don't know which is crazier. At least No Planes anywhere is consistent. That a plan would involve plane strikes in one location but faking it in another has no semblance of rationality to me.
__________________
Can you people please stop not thinking? - Gorgonian

The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist.
-Good luck America with President Trump

Last edited by cantonear1968; 16th April 2017 at 06:43 AM. Reason: Missed an "in".
cantonear1968 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 16th April 2017, 06:42 AM   #187
cantonear1968
Graduate Poster
 
cantonear1968's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,605
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
You've got that right - black ops teams were out in large masses everywhere.
And they still are: All debunkers are probably black-ops, as are the majority of truthers - all those who sing the confessional of any of the other denominations of Trutherdom.

I recently saw Dan Noel, AE911Truth's man for presenter teams, opine that most architects and engineers in the entire world as well as most governments and government agencies worldwide are part of the superbig conspiracy.
He is boldly leading the Truth Movement to its final destination, which has been prophesized years ago - not by them but by heretic guru RMackey: The inflationary limit of all CTs where the entire world is part of the Conspiracy.
For lurkers, a great addition to Oystein's post is RMackey's thread on what he coined Irreducible Delusion. It is where every 9/11 argument eventually devolves: either everything is fake or they're all in on it. Once that position has been reached there is no further discussion because you simply can't reason someone out of it.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...cible+delusion
__________________
Can you people please stop not thinking? - Gorgonian

The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist.
-Good luck America with President Trump

Last edited by cantonear1968; 16th April 2017 at 06:46 AM. Reason: Meant to include link.
cantonear1968 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 16th April 2017, 06:51 AM   #188
cantonear1968
Graduate Poster
 
cantonear1968's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,605
Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
I see no motivation for two law enforcement professionals to lie about their view of such a low flying plane, highlighted by the Pentagon explosion seconds later.

Such contradictions justify an investigation.

On the world stage, the military efforts by the spawn of 9/11 to make America great again might soon make all the topics in this forum ‘moot’.
My problem with their interview is that they were conducted together. Brooks should have been interviewed separately from Lagasse so he wouldn't be tainted or influenced by Lagasse's testimony. Interviewers who knew what they were doing would have done this.
__________________
Can you people please stop not thinking? - Gorgonian

The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist.
-Good luck America with President Trump
cantonear1968 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 16th April 2017, 10:03 AM   #189
FFTR
Scholar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 51
Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
I see no motivation for two law enforcement professionals to lie about their view of such a low flying plane, highlighted by the Pentagon explosion seconds later.

Such contradictions justify an investigation.

On the world stage, the military efforts by the spawn of 9/11 to make America great again might soon make all the topics in this forum ‘moot’.
Eye witness statements should be backed up by other physical evidence. Eye witnesses state what they believe they saw. Doesn't mean they are telling the truth.

witness A: shooter shot victim in the back
witness B: shooter shot the victim in the front.
medical examiner: victim was shot in the front.

Did witness A lie, most likely not. They reported what they believe.
Hence, what did the physical evidence say.

In the case of the Pentagon, what does the physical evidence tell us and how does that match up with witness statements? CIT failed.
FFTR 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 16th April 2017, 10:24 AM   #190
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 14,859
Originally Posted by cantonear1968 View Post
For lurkers, a great addition to Oystein's post is RMackey's thread on what he coined Irreducible Delusion. It is where every 9/11 argument eventually devolves: either everything is fake or they're all in on it. Once that position has been reached there is no further discussion because you simply can't reason someone out of it.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...cible+delusion
Somehow, "Irreducible Delusion" morphed into "Inflationary Limit" in my brai!?
__________________
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 16th April 2017, 11:15 AM   #191
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: 24,828
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
Somehow, "Irreducible Delusion" morphed into "Inflationary Limit" in my brai!?
Actually, I think you have it right. "Irreducible Delusion" refers to the one belief that every truther clings to in the face of any amount of evidence and simply will not give up, such that the only thing a debunker can do is point out what that delusion is. In this case, the irreducible delusion is that flight 77 pulled up and flew over the Pentagon, a belief that CIT cannot under any circumstances give up. Whereas "Inflationary Limit" is the point at which everyone who doesn't accept a specific conspiracy theory is held to be a member of the conspiracy.

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 16th April 2017, 03:45 PM   #192
Reheat
Illuminator
 
Reheat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: In Space
Posts: 3,493
Originally Posted by jaydeehess View Post
The City can also not bother using Boger as he says he watched the plane from first appearance at the top of the hill until it impacted the Pentagon.
Apparently, you missed the point of my joke above. It's been a long time. Under the criteria of eliminating all of the witnesses who don't support their CT, that eliminates ALL of them. There are then none left because every single one of the said AA 77 struck the Pentagon. That was the reason for the debunking dog.
__________________
[Noc]
Reheat 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 18th April 2017, 03:44 AM   #193
LSSBB
Devilish Dictionarian
 
LSSBB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: An elusive house at Bachelors Grove Cemetery
Posts: 15,353
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
Actually, I think you have it right. "Irreducible Delusion" refers to the one belief that every truther clings to in the face of any amount of evidence and simply will not give up, such that the only thing a debunker can do is point out what that delusion is. In this case, the irreducible delusion is that flight 77 pulled up and flew over the Pentagon, a belief that CIT cannot under any circumstances give up. Whereas "Inflationary Limit" is the point at which everyone who doesn't accept a specific conspiracy theory is held to be a member of the conspiracy.

Dave
Yes, irreducible delusion is when all the CTer has left are eyerollies, empty boasts like "reheat called out repeatedly", and silence when dumb statements asserting absence of evidence is evidence of absence are rightfully called out. Or ... they are either Poe or just trolling.
__________________
"Realize deeply that the present moment is all you ever have." (Eckhart Tolle, 2004)
LSSBB 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 18th April 2017, 03:50 AM   #194
MetalPig
Master Poster
 
MetalPig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: 22, Acacia Avenue
Posts: 2,814
Originally Posted by beachnut View Post
CIT did a fake investigation and fooled a few gullible people. 77 hit the Pentagon, a fact.
77 gullible people hit the Pentagon?
__________________
Just drive.
MetalPig 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 18th April 2017, 05:40 AM   #195
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 18,342
Originally Posted by MetalPig View Post
77 gullible people hit the Pentagon?
I thought it was more than that? How many were in the airplane?
__________________
Palestinian Refugees
Mycroft 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 18th April 2017, 06:03 AM   #196
Childlike Empress
Ewige Blumenkraft
 
Childlike Empress's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ivory Tower
Posts: 14,561
Ok, I think it was enough time for potentially interested "Skeptics" to find out for themselves which fallacy Reheat commits with his stunt. It's of course classic case Strawman. All is said about it for example starting here (see long version at the link in that post). Amusingly, Reheat described there quite accurately what he himself did in a typical case of projection, blaming one's own sins on someone else:

Originally Posted by Reheat View Post
He attempts to convince the reader of aeronautical absolutes when, in fact, he stretches his "evidence" by twisting just enough to convince the layman with his typical techno-babble.

Nuff said.
__________________
De-Putin-Nazify America!
...progress updates [1] [2] [3]...
Childlike Empress 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 18th April 2017, 06:12 AM   #197
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: 24,828
Originally Posted by Childlike Empress View Post
Ok, I think it was enough time for potentially interested "Skeptics" to find out for themselves which fallacy Reheat commits with his stunt.
While, of course, we're all aware, I hope, of the fallacy CE commits throughout this thread; the good old fallacy of denying the antecedent. If airliner parts are visible in a photograph, this implies that an airliner has crashed at or near the place the photograph was taken at some time prior to it being taken; if no airliner parts are visible in a photograph, CE concludes that no airliner can have crashed at or near the place the photograph was taken at some time prior to it being taken. CE will not of course be able to discern that this is a logical fallacy due to suffering from, or affecting to suffer from, the irreducible delusion that no airliner hit the Pentagon.

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 18th April 2017, 06:56 AM   #198
Reheat
Illuminator
 
Reheat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: In Space
Posts: 3,493
Originally Posted by Childlike Empress View Post
Ok, I think it was enough time for potentially interested "Skeptics" to find out for themselves which fallacy Reheat commits with his stunt. It's of course classic case Strawman. All is said about it for example starting here (see long version at the link in that post). Amusingly, Reheat described there quite accurately what he himself did in a typical case of projection, blaming one's own sins on someone else:
You've been building up to this bunch of tripe. You're really funny CE. You can't name the fallacy because there isn't one.

I'll tell you what... If you will find a witness who didn't say which I depicted in my chart, then clearly state what witness that was. When are you going to learn that witnesses can be mistaken in what they think they saw. I have taken every witness into account and did calculations based on that, eliminating the ones who described something that was impossible.

What you're refusing to admit is that the aircraft could not have completed any of the flight paths described.

Those large turn radii that Ranke drew in color have deceived you along with other things. No, the aircraft didn't fly any of those flight paths because they were impossible to fly based on CIT's own witness statements.

I realize that you want me to drop Morin's statements, but he was the most qualified witness in the group. He said it flew parallel to the edge of the Navy Annex. That was very logical as Paik said the exact same thing and that's where he pointed on the video. But, Morin misidentified it as a B-737 instead of a B-757. The most logical reason he misidentified it was that it was further from him that he thought over the known flight path South of Columbia Pike. He had no other background reference to compare, so it's an understandable mistake. Those two aircraft look very similar, but are a different size. Proper identification depends on the distance away from you that you perceive.

You need to stop posting nonsense. You continue to be fooled by fools and it's not me.
__________________
[Noc]
Reheat 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 18th April 2017, 07:03 AM   #199
Reheat
Illuminator
 
Reheat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: In Space
Posts: 3,493
BTW, that analysis is not techno babble as you've implied. It is straight forward aeronautical math. Anyone with knowledge of turn radii as related to bank angle and G's can do it. You're getting desperate to justify why it's wrong. When you're in a hole digging it's best to eventually stop if you want to get out.

You've lost, now get over it....
__________________
[Noc]
Reheat 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 18th April 2017, 08:00 AM   #200
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 24,791
Originally Posted by Childlike Empress View Post
Ok, I think it was enough time for potentially interested "Skeptics" to find out for themselves which fallacy Reheat commits with his stunt. It's of course classic case Strawman. All is said about it for example starting here (see long version at the link in that post). Amusingly, Reheat described there quite accurately what he himself did in a typical case of projection, blaming one's own sins on someone else:

Nuff said.
Originally Posted by Childlike Empress View Post
Fine show of projection there, Reheat. That's exactly what you do in the deceptive piece of junk science you link to in your signature - debunked about three years ago but still peddled by 911myths.
You post nuts at LC forum saying Flight 77 NoC flight path is possible as a debunking of math? Which flight path that CIT shows is the flight path?
The flight path is in the FDR and Radar data... you posted idiots like SPreston ...
Quote:
To return to the parallel official light pole flight path approximately 370 feet south of the decoy aircraft flight path above the Navy Annex, would require two severe split-second banks (right then immediate left which absolutely nobody anywhere witnessed) of the actual aircraft which was proven to be above the Navy Annex, within less than two seconds time. IMPOSSIBLE. Control surfaces and controls and pilots and aircraft cannot possibly react that fast. SPreston
Who has some fantasy decoy plane, and BS about flight paths. Where did the Decoy plane come from, and where is Flight 77 in SPrestions delusional version of 9/11?

The CIT idiot investigator who does debunk Reheat with this.
Quote:
The north side flight path is entirely aerodynamically possible. It is also what several witnesses saw with their own two eyes. Aldo Marquis CIT
Why use math to prove it is possible when you can just say it. Good job CE, you debunked Reheat using CIT logic; just say it is so, just believe it, it is a religion of woo; you won CE, your fantasy version of 9/11 is safe. Who needs math and physics, when you have woo, and Paik pointing to the official flight path.
What does CIT say about numbers being required, aka science?,
Quote:
No they won't. They aren't. I am not sure why you are not understanding this. Aldo Marquis CIT http://s1.zetaboards.com/LooseChange...63587&t=197914
There you have it, you win, this debunks Reheat's math, Aldo Marquis CIT nutcase bozo says math is not required.

The NoC flight paths are not possible, are debunked by the FDR; the FDR wins - and CE wins by ignoring science and accepting the religion of CIT, where numbers are not required, only woo will do.

Here is the proof the NoC is possible, because Craig says so, the Fetzer algorithm for woo.
Quote:
Craig Ranke CIT - But we know for a fact that the north of the citgo flight path in general is certainly possible.
CE debunked Reheat because Craig a certified failed flight investigator trained by nobody says so.

CE's fantasy is safe, even though Flight 77 knocked down lampposts and flew the flight path course recorded by the FDR, CD ignores evidence and goes for the failed interpretation of idiots, CIT, the Certified Idiot Team, the crack investigators for Balsamo's failed pilots who lie about 9/11. Yes CE, witness statements are evidence, but weigh in on the event as opinions in this case. Why do we witnesses when we have the FDR. And the link you says debunks Reheat has evidence witnesses on the roads under the official flight path had Flight 77 fly right over them... debunking the NoC. Thus, you debunk CIT with a link to LC nuts failing to accept or talk about the FDR and Radar, or any witnesses who don't support the NoC.

Math/Science/Physics lost to CIT, CE's fantasy version of 9/11, which remains a mystery, is safe. Sorry Reheat, take your silly math and sit down, woo wins in the minds of CTs.
__________________
"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

Last edited by beachnut; 18th April 2017 at 09:47 AM.
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
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 05:52 PM.
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.