New TWA Flight 800 film coming out

[Anders Lindman]

Originally Posted by Dcdrac

How do you know that they are where is your evidence and proof??

It's just my conclusion to make my conspiracy theory hold. I think the control of controllers has been going on for thousands of years, and that we still have that kind of control all over the world.

The purpose of the TWA 800 event and the 9/11 attacks was to massively expand the cabal power into the broader society. And that's something new. At least on such a huge scale.

[Anders Lindman]

Alternatively, the cabal doesn't need to control the controllers. Because they can blackmail the government etc without risking being threatened or prosecuted, because if they are then their threat can be activated. So then the cabal members can run around in the White House and not even the Secret Service can do anything about it.

And so, the Secret Service does then NOT need to be filled with cabal members.

Pretty tricky, eh?

[jargon buster]

Quote:

Pretty tricky, eh?

Nope, pretty dumb.
What you are then saying is your conspiracy holds regardless of the cabal being in or out of the government.
It's a win, win situation for Anders.



By the way, what 2 milliseconds of sound that are not missing do you think is missing?

[Anders Lindman]

Originally Posted by jargon buster

What you are then saying is your conspiracy holds regardless of the cabal being in or out of the government.

It's the control over the government via blackmail that is the trick. That control can be done even if the cabal doesn't have any members in the government.

[aggle-rithm]

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman

How do you know that the Secret Service is NOT filled with cabal members?

Your problem is that all of your premises are unfalsifiable. That means they are, effectively, indistinguishable from fantasy.

Come up with something that has some basis in reality, then we'll talk.

[Anders Lindman]

Originally Posted by aggle-rithm

Your problem is that all of your premises are unfalsifiable. That means they are, effectively, indistinguishable from fantasy.

Come up with something that has some basis in reality, then we'll talk.

Ok, show me official evidence of victims from TWA 800. Not some vague reference to 'bodies' because that could mean zero bodies and the investigators can talk about autopsies and fingerprints and DNA analysis etc because having done all that on ZERO bodies. A play on words basically.

[Dcdrac]

so once again Anders all you have is speculation that has no grounding in reality the same old CTer tricks you constantly use

[Anders Lindman]

Originally Posted by Dcdrac

so once again Anders all you have is speculation that has no grounding in relaity the same old CTer tricks you constantly use

But the official spark theory is dubious. 115 volt to cause a spark? And even that would have required some incredible short circuit, because the wires in the fuel tank were carrying much lower voltage and tiny currents (for measurement devices). (I read somewhere it's maximum 115 volt in a 747 not 150 volt as I wrote earlier.)

And the missile theory is perhaps possible, but the plane wreckage didn't show any obvious signs of that.

So my new theory that the explosion in the fuel tank was triggered remotely is actually a better explanation than both the official version and the missile conspiracy theories.

Pretty cool, huh?

[Dcdrac]

how are you quaified to judge it is dubious?

What research have you done, Have you actually read the full report yourself instead of relying on crank radio stations and websites?

[JLord]

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman

The purpose of the TWA 800 event and the 9/11 attacks was to massively expand the cabal power into the broader society.

How could TWA 800 and 9/11 be for te same purpose. It seems that according to the theory one was billed as a terrorist attack and one wasn't. Surely if both were for the same purpose then both would have been falsely billed as terror attacks?

[jargon buster]

Quote:

So my new theory that the explosion in the fuel tank was triggered remotely is actually a better explanation than both the official version and the missile conspiracy theories.

Pretty cool, huh?

Nah, pretty lame really.
My theory is the nephilim thought we were getting too big for our boots sending way too many planes into the sky at once so they decided to put a stop to it.
They brought the plane down by using a 3-D printer to print a huge cloud out of metal that the pilot crashed into.
Just before he hit it he realised it was metal due to the suns reflection and he shouted out "WTF"which took him 2 milliseconds to say, the nephilim being the prudes they are edited out of his flight recorder hence the two millisecond gap

Thats a far better theory than yours Anders, and way more believable, try and disprove it, I bet you cant.

[SUSpilot]

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman

How can I be ridiculed for this smoking gun:

"The CVR [Black box Cockpit Voice Recorder] recording consisted of four channels of audio information: one channel contained audio information recorded by the CAM, and the other three channels contained audio information recorded through the radio/intercom selector panels at the captain, first officer, and flight engineer positions."

"A sound spectrum study of the information recorded by the CVR revealed that twice within the last second of the CVR recording (about 0.73 and 0.68 seconds before the recording stopped), the captain's channel recorded harmonic tones at the 400 Hertz (Hz) frequency, but it did not record other electrical system background noise that it had recorded previously throughout the recording. These other electrical system background noises were recorded on the other CVR channels without interruption."

From: http://www.ntsb.org/Wiringcargodoor/...es/AAR0003.pdf

How can the the captain's channel stop recording background noise for brief periods while still recording the harmonic tones, while at the same time the other channels recorded the background noise?

OK, the captain's channel didn't record for a couple of microseconds on an analogue tape less then one second before the recording stopped.

Did it ever occur to you that the plane was breaking into two major components, with all of the associated cabling, and maybe, just maybe, the glitches were caused by the wire failing between the the captain's mic and the CVR?

Nah, you didn't think of that.

[Anders Lindman]

Originally Posted by Dcdrac

how are you quaified to judge it is dubious?

What research have you done, Have you actually read the full report yourself instead of relying on crank radio stations and websites?

"Th source of ignition energy for the explosion could not be determined with certainty, but, of the sources evaluated by the investigation, the most likely was a short circuit outside of the CWT that allowed excessive voltage to enter it through electrical wiring associated with the fuel quantity indication system." -- http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/reports/2000/AAR0003.pdf

Maybe you want to call that evidence and get some crackpot index points?

[Anders Lindman]

Originally Posted by JLord

How could TWA 800 and 9/11 be for te same purpose. It seems that according to the theory one was billed as a terrorist attack and one wasn't. Surely if both were for the same purpose then both would have been falsely billed as terror attacks?

No, the key is that there were no victims in either the TWA 800 incident or the 9/11 attacks.

[Anders Lindman]

Originally Posted by SUSpilot

OK, the captain's channel didn't record for a couple of microseconds on an analogue tape less then one second before the recording stopped.

Did it ever occur to you that the plane was breaking into two major components, with all of the associated cabling, and maybe, just maybe, the glitches were caused by the wire failing between the the captain's mic and the CVR?

Nah, you didn't think of that.

Even if the captain's channel had a separate power supply, and the power completely interrupted, then even if the interruption was two super short glitches, capacitor effects in the recording device would still be too sluggish to be able to register gaps of 2 microseconds on the analogue tape.

[Dcdrac]

there were plenty of victims in both incidents anders you would know that if you were in touch with the reality of what happened.

[aggle-rithm]

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman

Ok, show me official evidence of victims from TWA 800. Not some vague reference to 'bodies' because that could mean zero bodies and the investigators can talk about autopsies and fingerprints and DNA analysis etc because having done all that on ZERO bodies. A play on words basically.

This is what I mean by unfalsifiable. Any evidence presented to you would be rejected as having failed to meet some arbitrary criteria. Therefore there is no way to prove you wrong.

Great for your ego, not so great for determining the truth about anything.

[jargon buster]

Quote:

No, the key is that there were no victims in either the TWA 800 incident or the 9/11 attacks.

Yes, because its much easier to have fake victims with actors playing the grieving relatives and ensuring they keep it a secret for ever than to just kill real people.

Anders, you are now bordering on insulting the memories of the people who lost their lives.

ITS NOT BIG AND ITS NOT CLEVER

[Anders Lindman]

Originally Posted by aggle-rithm

This is what I mean by unfalsifiable. Any evidence presented to you would be rejected as having failed to meet some arbitrary criteria. Therefore there is no way to prove you wrong.

Great for your ego, not so great for determining the truth about anything.

With something that seemed convincing it would at least make me doubt my new conspiracy theory.

[Dcdrac]

anders you have no new theory jsut the same okd regurgitated and tired garbage

[Anders Lindman]

Originally Posted by jargon buster

Yes, because its much easier to have fake victims with actors playing the grieving relatives and ensuring they keep it a secret for ever than to just kill real people.

Anders, you are now bordering on insulting the memories of the people who lost their lives.

ITS NOT BIG AND ITS NOT CLEVER

But you have already replied to my previous post:

"Why the need to have the plane empty of people? Why not just blow up an ordinary airliner full with passengers and crew members? One reason is if the shadow cabal are not entirely like evil monsters and actually want to spare the lives of innocent people. A more sinister and powerful purpose however is that if it was an ordinary airliner with people in it, then not much of a coverup would be needed. On the other hand, if there were no actual victims, and news about it being an ordinary passenger flight had already gone out via the media, then it was too late to admit that the plane was empty of people! Think about it, what would the government say? Would the President admit that there must be some powerful shadow cabal operating in the U.S. capable of staging something as colossal as the TWA 800 crash? No way. Because that would undermine the whole public power structure. It was much easier to just cover up the part about the victims by creating fake victims and their families. And once that first coverup was done: checkmate! The cabal could then start to blackmail the government etc like crazy. At first only those people who were in on the coverup, which was many but not that many. That would come to change after the 9/11 attacks, with millions of people in positions of power and in other key positions being forced to go along with a coverup." -- http://www.internationalskeptics.com...&postcount=268

And I have also posted:

"Admittedly, my new conspiracy theory is extreme. I can defend it by proposing what the purpose of blowing up an airliner empty of people would be. What was the motive? Is there a motive? Yes, there is a huge motive.

The idea goes like this:

The TWA 800 event was a warming up for the 9/11 attacks. And just as the much bigger event, the TWA 800 crash was devised to get massive control over the U.S. power structure. By forcing the government, media, academia etc to do a coverup, the whole legal power structure became compromised and manipulable. A shadow cabal can blackmail the whole government again and again as long as the coverup has to be upheld. If people in position of power don't get along with the coverup, the cabal can expose it themselves with catastrophic consequences for the whole society." -- http://www.internationalskeptics.com...&postcount=263

[beachnut]

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman

No, the key is that there were no victims in either the TWA 800 incident or the 9/11 attacks.

No victims. Dead people are not real. You are so nice, guess the victim families and friends can relax, no more need to be sad, the people killed in the crash of 800, and murdered on 911 never were real. Did you tell 60 Minutes, they could use a story, or 48 hours... ?

You are so nice; where can I have the victim families send you thank you cards.

Speical posts of extra credit woo - at JREF...

[Anders Lindman]

Originally Posted by beachnut

You are so nice; where can I have the victim families send you thank you cards.

First you need to find the victim families. And I don't mean actors like: Sandy Hook Victims Father Caught Laughing And Joking Then Tries To Act Serious For The News Camera! -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkCB2Ee9cqw

[aggle-rithm]

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman

With something that seemed convincing it would at least make me doubt my new conspiracy theory.

I can't believe I'm having this discussion. It's like talking to a chimp.

Be that as it may: The evidence for bodies is far more convincing than your evidence for a cabal.

[Dcdrac]

anders youtube can not be taken seriously as a source nor can Coast to coast radio your ct regurgitations have no credability

[ComfySlippers]

Originally Posted by jargon buster

Yes, because its much easier to have fake victims with actors playing the grieving relatives and ensuring they keep it a secret for ever than to just kill real people.

Anders, you are now bordering on insulting the memories of the people who lost their lives.

ITS NOT BIG AND ITS NOT CLEVER

Anders crossed that border a long time ago.

Trolls, as annoying as they can be, are usually just harmless buffoons who get kicks from thinking they're winding people up. Anders certainly gets his jollies from this despite the fact that mostly people aren't getting wound up by his garbage, they are laughing at his sad life.

However, when these sad gits start the whole "There were no deaths" routine it changes from being harmless trolling into a display of mental illness.

According to Professor Anders, like every other basement-dwelling super-sleuth, he can happily inform us that there were no deaths in TWA-800, 9/11 or Sandy Hooks. And I do mean "happily"... remember he actually gets his thrills from saying these things!

Don't get excited Anders, I'm not feeding you, simply asking that you get out more and maybe seek some kind of help for your problem.

[jargon buster]

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman

First you need to find the victim families. And I don't mean actors like: Sandy Hook Victims Father Caught Laughing And Joking Then Tries To Act Serious For The News Camera! -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkCB2Ee9cqw

And down the ladder you go even further to try and get a reaction.
I used to enjoy our little tit for tats Anders but you have now lost a sparring partner.
I wont be responding to you again because frankly even I have boundaries (Mr Menard might tell you otherwise)

Enjoy your time alone on the forum Anders because I was one of the only people engaging with you.

Bye bye.

[R.A.F.]

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman

First you need to find the victim families.

I guess that answers the question of "how much further can you embarrass/debase yourself?"

[Anders Lindman]

The experts who want a reinvestigation of the TWA 800 incident KNOW that there were no victims, and now they want to expose that. That's safe because people have become so tired of conspiracy rumors that they will just yawn at any exposure, no matter how big.

[R.A.F.]

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman

The experts who want a reinvestigation of the TWA 800 incident KNOW that there were no victims, and now they want to expose that.

Are we supposed to be impressed by the number of lies you tell?

[Dcdrac]

SO far I can only see crank websites reporting anders garbage

[pteridine]

USCGC Bainbridge Island recovered some of the victims. They went on a rescue mission only to discover there was no one to rescue. Smoke, flames, search lights, and people calling across the water provided an unreal atmosphere. The strong odor of jet fuel mixed with the smells of broken toiletries and cologne as the suitcases were recovered. Bodies were stripped of most clothing from the impact with the water. Some had only running shoes on which didn't get stripped.

There were people aboard the aircraft.

[Anders Lindman]

Originally Posted by R.A.F.

Are we supposed to be impressed by the number of lies you tell?

On a second thought the investigation could have been completely compartmentalized. So that those experts who today want a reinvestigation never had anything to do with the rescue and autopsies of the supposed bodies themselves.

[SezMe]

Originally Posted by HotRodDeluxe

Please stop.

Yes. And that applies to Anders and the rest of us. Anders has fallen below any level of respectability. Give him no attention. None. Let Make the thread die.

[dudalb]

Originally Posted by SezMe

Yes. And that applies to Anders and the rest of us. Anders has fallen below any level of respectability. Give him no attention. None. Let Make the thread die.

In other words, Don't Feed The Troll.

[chris lz]

To take the discussion back to more serious points, the film apparently will use the claim radar shows debris moving away from the aircraft at Mach 4. 1- has anyone a comment on the quality of this evidence; 2- would mach 4 necessarily prove outside force?

[LSSBB]

Originally Posted by chris lz

To take the discussion back to more serious points, the film apparently will use the claim radar shows debris moving away from the aircraft at Mach 4. 1- has anyone a comment on the quality of this evidence; 2- would mach 4 necessarily prove outside force?

Sounds like a job for BCR.

[matt.tansy]

Originally Posted by chris lz

To take the discussion back to more serious points, the film apparently will use the claim radar shows debris moving away from the aircraft at Mach 4. 1- has anyone a comment on the quality of this evidence; 2- would Mach 4 necessarily prove outside force?

It's dubious. A chunk of metal expelled by an explosion will very quickly slow down due to drag with the air. If expelled at Mach 4 (1180 m/s) a representative chunk will slow down to 1 m/s after traveling 727 meters. If expelled at 200 m/s it will slow down to 1 m/s after traveling 545 meters. At either expulsion speed the object will slow down almost to a complete stop in the time it took the radar to sweep the area on two consecutive sweeps (every 5 or 6 seconds). The difference in distance traveled with those initial expulsion speeds is 182 meters (.1 nautical mile). I doubt the radar used was capable of measuring that difference at the scale used on the radar. If the movie claims this Mach 4 debris was observed moving over two sweeps then they are full of it.

Does the movie say it was aircraft debris or the remnants of an exploded missile, because Mach 4 is the speed of a typical surface to air missile.

For a missile to expel aircraft parts at Mach 4 it would have to explode inside the aircraft, practically touching the parts that got expelled.

[akama1]

Originally Posted by chris lz

To take the discussion back to more serious points, the film apparently will use the claim radar shows debris moving away from the aircraft at Mach 4. 1- has anyone a comment on the quality of this evidence; 2- would mach 4 necessarily prove outside force?

Something travelling at Mach 4 would be very loud, and quiet obvious to anyone near by me thinks. I will need to see the doc first, but I highly doubt there will be any earth shattering info. I find the evidence from the victims one of the strongest cases against a missile/bomb, and I can not see this doc explaining the discrepancy at all

As to the other poster, everytime I see this

Quote:

This message is hidden because Anders Lindman is on your ignore list.

I feel happy inside.

[chris lz]

Originally Posted by matt.tansy

It's dubious. A chunk of metal expelled by an explosion will very quickly slow down due to drag with the air. If expelled at Mach 4 (1180 m/s) a representative chunk will slow down to 1 m/s after traveling 727 meters. If expelled at 200 m/s it will slow down to 1 m/s after traveling 545 meters. At either expulsion speed the object will slow down almost to a complete stop in the time it took the radar to sweep the area on two consecutive sweeps (every 5 or 6 seconds). The difference in distance traveled with those initial expulsion speeds is 182 meters (.1 nautical mile). I doubt the radar used was capable of measuring that difference at the scale used on the radar. If the movie claims this Mach 4 debris was observed moving over two sweeps then they are full of it.

Does the movie say it was aircraft debris or the remnants of an exploded missile, because Mach 4 is the speed of a typical surface to air missile.

For a missile to expel aircraft parts at Mach 4 it would have to explode inside the aircraft, practically touching the parts that got expelled.

The claim is from several posters. But when I looked at the FIRO site just now, it claims the various radars indicate a Mach 2 ejecta speed. Might a CWT explosion be violent enough to expel something at 1400-1700 whatever it is mph?