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 2nd August 2019, 09:43 AM   #401
SpitfireIX
Illuminator
 
SpitfireIX's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana, USA
Posts: 4,712
Originally Posted by rubygray View Post
There is a blue sign on top of the porch which merely says,
"CORRIDORS 1 & 2".

That is the obvious place to have such helpful signs, since there are many shrubs and obstructions inside the courtyard.
Stairs ascend each side from ground level to the rooftop of this porch, which probably is somewhere that people use on breaks. There is what appears to be a large FIXED WINDOW behind the man in the yellow vest. This is NOT necessarily an exit from the building.

Dennis Smith was VERY EXPLICIT as to his location.

"AT THE APEX" means, at the point where the two corridors meet, which is that large doorway on ground level.

"OUTSIDE" means, in the open air; not standing inside the building.

Interior view of Apex 1, 2 2nd-floor exit to courtyard, cropped and slightly resized. Original here. (It's the fourth image in the slide show.)



Detail of photo from former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta's retirement ceremony, showing Apex 5, 6 2nd-floor exit to courtyard. Original here.



Originally Posted by rubygray View Post
Please go back to my scale diagrams, and draw in your idea of the location meeting Smith's specific criteria, from which you imagine he had any view at all of the tail of the approaching plane.

Beachnut is the one who first suggested 4 seconds or 3,200 feet from impact, so that is the figure I used.

In your analysis, you made several demonstrably questionable or incorrect assumptions, some of which have been previously mentioned. They include, but are not limited to: Failing to take into account potential inaccuracy in the altimeter readings, failing to take into account that the aircraft's attitude was nose-down, and placing the highest point of the Pentagon's roof too close to Smith. And now we can definitely add "assuming that Smith was at ground level" to the list.

Fail.
__________________
Handy responses to conspiracy theorists' claims:
1) "I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." --Charles Babbage
2) "This isn't right. This isn't even wrong." --Wolfgang Pauli
3) "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." --Inigo Montoya
SpitfireIX 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 August 2019, 10:40 AM   #402
AJM8125
Potsing Whiled Runk
Tagger
 
AJM8125's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 20,677
Say rubygray, by the way -

Has anyone, anyone at all, ever come forward and said they absolutely, most certainly and as a matter of fact did see, with their own eyes, see a great ******* airliner make a run up to the Pentagon, pull up and fly over it?

If not, why not?

Where are the passengers and crew of Flight 77?

What you say, rubygray?
__________________


The better you get, the harder you work.

Last edited by AJM8125; 2nd August 2019 at 10:50 AM.
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 2nd August 2019, 11:55 AM   #403
CompusMentus
Waiting for the Worms
 
CompusMentus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Swansea UK
Posts: 1,638
Originally Posted by SpitfireIX View Post
Interior view of Apex 1, 2 2nd-floor exit to courtyard, cropped and slightly resized. Original here. (It's the fourth image in the slide show.)



<snip>


In your analysis, you made several demonstrably questionable or incorrect assumptions, some of which have been previously mentioned. They include, but are not limited to: Failing to take into account potential inaccuracy in the altimeter readings, failing to take into account that the aircraft's attitude was nose-down, and placing the highest point of the Pentagon's roof too close to Smith. And now we can definitely add "assuming that Smith was at ground level" to the list.

Fail.

Thank-you greatly for that SpitfireIX. That picture confirms my suspicions about the position of the C1 & C2 Apex entrance/exit doors.

As you state above, Ruby has failed on many counts. In particular remarkably failing to answer/ignoring very pertinent questions from numerous posters here including you, me, AJM8125, Beachnut, Axxman300, Dave Rogers, waypastvne, Captain_Swoop and several others, with these questions repeated ad nauseum.

Ruby's refusal to reply is telling and familiar, born of the hope that if she ignores the questions for long enough posters will somehow forget and stop asking. Not going to happen Ruby. Welcome to ISF.....

Compus
__________________
Tongue-tied and twisted just an earth-bound misfit

Last edited by CompusMentus; 2nd August 2019 at 12:49 PM. Reason: Inclusion
CompusMentus 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 August 2019, 12:06 PM   #404
CompusMentus
Waiting for the Worms
 
CompusMentus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Swansea UK
Posts: 1,638
BTW I forgot to name the source of the pictures I posted of the Centre Court area of the Pentagon.

They are taken from this book Pentagon 9/11

I purchased the Kindle Edition and found it very informative, detailed and well worth the couple of quid it cost me.

Spend a couple of Aussie bucks Ruby, go ahead treat yourself and read some true facts about what happened that day.

Compus
__________________
Tongue-tied and twisted just an earth-bound misfit

Last edited by CompusMentus; 2nd August 2019 at 12:43 PM. Reason: Clarity
CompusMentus 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 August 2019, 12:40 PM   #405
SpitfireIX
Illuminator
 
SpitfireIX's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana, USA
Posts: 4,712
Originally Posted by CompusMentus View Post
Thank-you greatly for that SpitfireIX. That picture confirms my suspicions about the position of the C1 & C2 Apex entrance/exit doors.

__________________
Handy responses to conspiracy theorists' claims:
1) "I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." --Charles Babbage
2) "This isn't right. This isn't even wrong." --Wolfgang Pauli
3) "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." --Inigo Montoya
SpitfireIX 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 August 2019, 01:16 PM   #406
Myriad
Hyperthetical
 
Myriad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: A pocket paradise between the sewage treatment plant and the railroad
Posts: 15,111
When this topic came up before I did some detailed calculations for whether or not Smith could have seen the tail (the top of the vertical stabilizer) from ground level in the courtyard near the 1-2 apex, during any part of the final 15 seconds or so of the flight path. If he were on the ground, he of course wouldn't have had to be standing snug into the corner; in fact, that would be unlikely as that would be standing in the way of potential traffic, and someone taking a break would more likely step farther into the courtyard. A few steps toward the center, where there appear to be trapezoid-shaped patios ideal for standing around on, would make the line of sight to the latter part of the flight path no longer impeded by the southwest wall, but only by the relatively more distant west wall. However, the heights still don't work. Taking into account the wall heights, the height of the vertical stabilizer above the main axis of the plane, the elevation of the plane above Pentagon ground level along the flight path, the plane's tilt angle, and even Smith's height, he couldn't have seen the tail.

In fact, even if he'd been standing at the 9-10 apex, the tail would have been just a little too low to see.

If he were on the entryway balcony instead of courtyard ground level, at apex 1-2, that still wouldn't let him see the tail because that position forces him to be close to the inside corner where the southwest wall is still in the way.

But, if he'd been at the 9-10 apex, and up on the entryway balcony 15 or 16 feet above courtyard ground level, he would have seen exactly what he described. The tail would not have been visible for the impact itself or for about 2 seconds before the impact, but prior to that (where the plane was higher and its descent was steeper) it would have been visible.

For me, this changes my preferred explanation from Smith having a false memory of having seen the plane's tail (perhaps as a result of hearing some colleague's account who did see it) to Smith mis-remembering which apex he was at. Since he went to his own office after the crash, and from there to the 3-4 apex (apparently by way of the 1-2 apex), it's plausible for him to have misremembered that detail.

The most unlikely possibility is that he made up the story deliberately, to corroborate an "official" hoax. To do that he would have had to do the same kind of calculations I did to learn that the tail and only the tail would have been briefly visible from one place in the courtyard, but then put himself at the wrong place in his account.
__________________
A zÝmbie once bit my sister...
Myriad is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd August 2019, 05:02 AM   #407
pgimeno
Illuminator
 
pgimeno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,389
Originally Posted by rubygray
I will go with my professional image analyst opinion [...]
Your professional image analyst opinion? Let's see...

When presented this image:

you said:
Originally Posted by rubygray View Post
There is what appears to be a large FIXED WINDOW behind the man in the yellow vest.
Yet, it's clearly a door. This is from the apex of corridors 5 and 6 instead of 1 and 2 but there are really no reasons to think the 1 and 2 feature is different:
Originally Posted by SpitfireIX View Post
Because of the above, let me question your abilities as a "professional image analyst".

You seem to be strongly driven by confirmation bias. You adhere to the inflationary model of conspiracy theories through innuendo. I can explain every piece of evidence you have presented, under the assumption that AA77 crashed into the Pentagon; you, on the other hand, don't have explanations for the most glaring pieces of evidence that a plane crashed there, including among others:

- Dennis Smith's lack of testimony of a fly-by.
- The report by Dennis Smith that there were pieces of a plane such as tyres in the A-E drive when he arrived.
- The fact that in one of the photographs of the victims, a Navy Command ID is shown.
- That it's aerodynamically impossible for a plane to turn in a way that CIT or you suggest it happened.
- That many witnesses saw the crash, and no witness saw the fly-by.
- The fact that the CVR was found (no matter by whom - people may lie just to get credited for something, or interpret things differently, e.g. both the person who spotted it and the person who picked it up could say that they "found the black box") but it was destroyed.
- The fact that the FDR was found (again no matter by whom) and had valid data which identified the flight path.
- The radar data which shows the plane approaching in a trajectory consistent with the FDR data.
- The fact that almost every Pentagon worker and AA77 passenger who died was found. You give no explanation as to where they are.

Instead, you selectively give weight to witness statements depending on your bias, instead of trying to put every piece of evidence together in a coherent narrative and being cautious about the reliability of witness declarations.

If I can explain nearly all pieces of evidence, and you can't, what's more likely?

- That I'm wrong.
- That you're wrong.

Think before you answer.
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 3rd August 2019, 11:24 AM   #408
CompusMentus
Waiting for the Worms
 
CompusMentus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Swansea UK
Posts: 1,638
Originally Posted by pgimeno View Post

You seem to be strongly driven by confirmation bias. You adhere to the inflationary model of conspiracy theories

Exactly.....

Also by the same (sorely missed) author The Irreducible Delusion

I lost count of how many traits Mr Mackey identifies in these analyses that Ruby displays.

Mackey also advises prudently there on how to deal with such stubborn ignorance. I am tempted to heed his counsel.

Compus
__________________
Tongue-tied and twisted just an earth-bound misfit
CompusMentus 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 09:09 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

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

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