IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts 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 20th April 2016, 01:15 AM   #241
Ape of Good Hope
Graduate Poster
 
Ape of Good Hope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,502
Originally Posted by yankee451 View Post

Steve, you tried this particular line of stupidity before, do you remember?


here, in 2013:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...01#post9057701


and here, in 2014:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...5&postcount=15


In both instances you made a quite memorable tool of yourself, and in the second instance, the thread was sent to AAH and you were yellow-carded.


...aah, memories
Ape of Good Hope 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 20th April 2016, 01:16 AM   #242
ozeco41
Philosopher
 
ozeco41's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Moss Vale, NSW, Australia
Posts: 7,617
Originally Posted by GlennB View Post
Perhaps they reject applications from duplicate IP addresses ?

Incidentally I was interested in looking at the PfT forum once again after some years away, but whatever route I tried to take got me redirected to a rather nasty-looking porn site.
Since MM is no longer a member the gloves can come off and we can use blunt honesty in describing his performance here.

It is a sign of the decline in posting quality from trolling sources that Criteria should refer to MM as an authority.

MM single handed lowered the level if trolling on this forum by his resort to malicious personal attacks as his primary weapon and his dishonesty should become legendary - it set benchmark for those who want to go even lower.

The real challenge should be to raise the level of debate - not seek to emulate MM's sad record.
ozeco41 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 20th April 2016, 01:50 AM   #243
TheGoldcountry
Philosopher
 
TheGoldcountry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 8,131
Originally Posted by Ape of Good Hope View Post
Steve, you tried this particular line of stupidity before, do you remember?


here, in 2013:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...01#post9057701


and here, in 2014:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...5&postcount=15


In both instances you made a quite memorable tool of yourself, and in the second instance, the thread was sent to AAH and you were yellow-carded.


...aah, memories
wow, amazing. The guy cleans blood off his face, so the whole thing is fake? I've had a nose injury exactly like that, there was a puddle of blood underneath me. Once I cleaned it up, I had a band-aid just like that. That doesn't mean my nose felt very good for a long time, but it looked OK after I readjusted it.
__________________
I have no idea what you're trying to say, but I'm still pretty sure that you're wrong. -Akhenaten
I sometimes think the Bible was inspired by Satan to make God look bad. And then it backfired on Him when He underestimated the stupidity of religious ideologues. -MontagK505
TheGoldcountry 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 20th April 2016, 06:49 AM   #244
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: USA! USA!
Posts: 24,384
Originally Posted by Ape of Good Hope View Post

...aah, memories
MirageMemories, at that.
carlitos 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 20th April 2016, 09:19 AM   #245
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 26,122
Originally Posted by ozeco41 View Post
...
I especially liked one episode where Inertial Nav data - as interpreted by the P4T Truther - showed the plane taking off from ploughed farmland 1000 feet from and parallel with the runway.

I suggested that interpretation of the data OR the original setting of the gadget could be wrong. And that the plane probably took off from the runaway. Daring ploy by me since I'm not qualified in IFR flying. Not even a pilot.

Remember the old adage - "Don't reset your mind - we have a temporary disruption to reality" or words to that effect.
From planes which are flying after crashing, to the course off in the weeds, there was no reality from Balsamo.
He never explained why the INS was not perfect.
The INS does not wake up perfect; we enter the best present position and start it, it decides based on the earth model where it is at; it does not "wake up" where you tell it it is, it wakes up where the earth model says it is at. Thinking about the gyros sitting there, if there is any error at all in the placement of the gyros, that is an error present when the system senses where on earth it is. The navigator that crewed with me for a few years went on to work with NASA, his best alignment for the INS was .1 NM. Pilots might not know how good the alignment, we don't use the INS to taxi, we don't use it to take off, we use it after we are airborne to fly to the next point, the next point is out there. The airways were 8nm wide, .1 mile, .25 mile error is meaningless back in the INS DME/VOR nav days.

An oxymoron is born; Balsamo : aviation authority.
__________________
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen" - Albert Einstein
"... education as the means of developing our greatest abilities" - JFK

Last edited by beachnut; 20th April 2016 at 09:21 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
Old 20th April 2016, 12:27 PM   #246
Criteria
Critical Thinker
 
Criteria's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 470
Originally Posted by ozeco41 View Post
Since MM is no longer a member the gloves can come off and we can use blunt honesty in describing his performance here.

It is a sign of the decline in posting quality from trolling sources that Criteria should refer to MM as an authority.

MM single handed lowered the level if trolling on this forum by his resort to malicious personal attacks as his primary weapon and his dishonesty should become legendary - it set benchmark for those who want to go even lower.

The real challenge should be to raise the level of debate - not seek to emulate MM's sad record.
Since I do not want to receive information from a discredited source, I would be quite interested in reading any fact-based evidence which supports your statement that miragememories was guilty of "legendary dishonesty".

I have read scads of posts in this forum, many of which were posted by him and I do not recall any instances of blatant dishonesty?

Considering the level of trolling that occurs here to attract and provoke would-be troothers, it seems rather funny that you would target him as a major instigator of such behaviour.
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 20th April 2016, 12:40 PM   #247
NoahFence
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 22,131
Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
Since I do not want to receive information from a discredited source, I would be quite interested in reading any fact-based evidence which supports your statement that miragememories was guilty of "legendary dishonesty".

I have read scads of posts in this forum, many of which were posted by him and I do not recall any instances of blatant dishonesty?

Considering the level of trolling that occurs here to attract and provoke would-be troothers, it seems rather funny that you would target him as a major instigator of such behaviour.
MM is a truther. Legendary Dishonesty is a job requirement.
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 20th April 2016, 01:18 PM   #248
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 26,122
Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
Since I do not want to receive information from a discredited source, I would be quite interested in reading any fact-based evidence which supports your statement that miragememories was guilty of "legendary dishonesty".

I have read scads of posts in this forum, many of which were posted by him and I do not recall any instances of blatant dishonesty?

Considering the level of trolling that occurs here to attract and provoke would-be troothers, it seems rather funny that you would target him as a major instigator of such behaviour.
Why did MM troll? Was it to spread false claims, instances of blatant dishonesty?
oops
Originally Posted by Miragememories View Post
... Until you can discredit the north of Citco, on-the-record eyewitness testimony, the fallen lightpoles remain as 'smoking gun' evidence that the Pentagon attack was a masquerade. ...
Okay, this is dishonest because, using FDR and Radar, it could only be Flight 77 which hit the lampposts. Thus the smoking gun masquerade, is it blatant dishonest. Too lazy to do the work, or dishonest? Too stupid to understand FDR and Radar, or too gullible spewing delusional claptrap from CIT? Could it be unconscious blatant dishonesty (UBD).


Originally Posted by Miragememories View Post
...With respect to the Pentagon, you are correct, the northern flightpath witnesses create a solid case against the official flightpath. ...
No, they are actually pointing to the southern flight path, the reality based flight path proved by FDR, lamppost, and impact damage. Thus another blatant dishonesty due to having a fantasy, and MM took zero time to research Flight 77's flight path. Why does MM lie; why would he not watch the video where witnesses are pointing to the flight path on the FDR? Solid evidence is in the FDR, not a witness statement.

Originally Posted by Miragememories View Post
I have read reports from veteran pilots who claim that hitting the Towers using a simulator was extremely difficult.

Of course being God's gift to aviation, I'm sure you could hit a pea in its pod
in your sleep.

MM
At least MM got some things right.
First he starts out with logical BS; how could a veteran pilot claim it is difficult to hit 1300 foot tall, 200 foot wide towers? How can a veteran pilot claim this when they land on 150 foot wide runways within inches of the center-line. This should be blatant dishonestly, but most likely parroting BS from idiots in 9/11 truth, who sampled less than 0.1 percent of all pilots.
How do 9/11 truth pilots land, if they can't hit a 200 foot wide target? MM is not logical - think about it; do you want your pilot who can't hit 200 foot wide target flying you to land on a 150 foot wide target, the runway? Not me.

Of course the next part is correct; "who is the best pilot I know", you ask me... you are looking at him. What is a pilot suppose to say. It is true, I can land on a dime, and give you 9 cents change. Or is it hit a pea in its pod... What pilot brags he can't hit a 200 foot wide target? The aviation authority, Balsamo, and MM believes. I believe it too, Balsamo can't hit a 200-900 foot wide target, as he says. A true statement, the mark of an aviation authority.


Originally Posted by Miragememories View Post
... The idiots are those who succumb to what what they wish to believe and continue to ignore evidence to the contrary. MM
Blatant irony. Arguing that 77 did not hit the Pentagon on the true course (true north course) found in the FDR, on the path of damage done by 77... MM is the idiot who ignores hard evidence from the FDR found in the Pentagon, on the path of destruction which matches the path in the FDR... hello
Thus MM is the one using witness statements, quote-mined hearsay witness statements, aka soft evidence to support BS. And all the CIT witnesses agree it was 77 which hit the Pentagon. oops - kind of more blatant dishonesty because a witness on the ground cannot accurately estimate the flight path of plane.
The idiots, turns out to be projection.

Originally Posted by Miragememories View Post
... When NIST increased the aircraft speed to 570 mph for the 767 impacting WTC2, combined with other exaggerations to the critical parameters in their more severe case computer model, they finally achieved a successful collapse initiation in their computer model. ...
... Blatant quibbler on NIST. Thinks estimate are wrong if they are in different sections and don't match...
Has no clue one person might call 10,000 gallons of jet fuel 60,000 pounds, and another 66,000 pounds, and then a third will quote temperature and give you 67,000 pounds, or apologize they were talking about JPTS, or JP7, or JP4, or ... etc...

MM, offered little or no evidence to support the inside job, and does believe Israel had a hand in it... MM and CIT? wow
Witness statements over hard evidence... illogical
__________________
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen" - Albert Einstein
"... education as the means of developing our greatest abilities" - JFK

Last edited by beachnut; 20th April 2016 at 02:02 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 20th April 2016, 03:29 PM   #249
ozeco41
Philosopher
 
ozeco41's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Moss Vale, NSW, Australia
Posts: 7,617
Originally Posted by beachnut View Post
From planes which are flying after crashing, to the course off in the weeds, there was no reality from Balsamo.
He never explained why the INS was not perfect.
The INS does not wake up perfect; we enter the best present position and start it, it decides based on the earth model where it is at; it does not "wake up" where you tell it it is, it wakes up where the earth model says it is at. Thinking about the gyros sitting there, if there is any error at all in the placement of the gyros, that is an error present when the system senses where on earth it is.
As an engineer I always marvelled at how accurate INS could be given the simple mechanical basis of spinning gyroscopes. Which inherently have problems with long term "drift" >> "Where the hell am I?" on wake up to start a new day at the office. My focus not on accumulation of errors which were/are an inbuilt part of the mechanical solution. Marvelling how good it was NOT how good it wasn't. Then we got GPS and the world of measurement changed.

I recall when I was "City Engineer" and my design engineers wanted to buy a GPS based set of survey instruments. Very early days for GPS so prices were high. And - typical of many office based theory engineers - they wanted the highest accuracy models which cost several times the price. Pragmatic me had to point out the two obvious facts:
1) You don't need the length of the city block to the nearest half inch when building a road or laying a water main. You may need inch accuracy doing the details at an intersection or connecting the last pipe; AND
2) Give it a year or two and the prices will come down.

I think they waited till I was looking the other way and bought the dear one.
Originally Posted by beachnut View Post
The navigator that crewed with me for a few years went on to work with NASA, his best alignment for the INS was .1 NM. Pilots might not know how good the alignment, we don't use the INS to taxi, we don't use it to take off, we use it after we are airborne to fly to the next point, the next point is out there. The airways were 8nm wide, .1 mile, .25 mile error is meaningless back in the INS DME/VOR nav days.
The OYELOTW* process for those who like acronyms???

Originally Posted by beachnut View Post
An oxymoron is born; Balsamo : aviation authority.
When I look for authoritative advice I'll stick with you as my #1 reference on aviation matters; Sunstealer on metallurgy, several on pure physics. Those being the important technical areas. I can look after myself on applied physics. Most of the other specialities only come up when discussion has gone off track chasing a truther/troll down a rabbit burrow.

* "Open Your Eyes Look Out The Window"
ozeco41 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 20th April 2016, 11:19 PM   #250
GlennB
Loggerheaded, earth-vexing fustilarian
 
GlennB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wales
Posts: 31,398
Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
Since I do not want to receive information from a discredited source, I would be quite interested in reading any fact-based evidence which supports your statement that miragememories was guilty of "legendary dishonesty".
Since you have direct contact with MM then why not ask him about his 40 years experience in the audio-visual industry?
__________________
"There ain't half been some clever bastards" - Ian Dury
GlennB 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 22nd April 2016, 08:49 AM   #251
Criteria
Critical Thinker
 
Criteria's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 470
Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
Since I do not want to receive information from a discredited source, I would be quite interested in reading any fact-based evidence which supports your statement that miragememories was guilty of "legendary dishonesty".

I have read scads of posts in this forum, many of which were posted by him and I do not recall any instances of blatant dishonesty?

Considering the level of trolling that occurs here to attract and provoke would-be troothers, it seems rather funny that you would target him as a major instigator of such behaviour.
Originally Posted by Miragememories View Post
The question to be asked is; what happened inside the Pentagon?

What is the truth behind the fallen lightpoles?

An honest seeker of the truth cannot dismiss the logical conclusion that a north of Citco flightpath means the fallen lightpoles had to have been planted evidence.

Until you can discredit the north of Citco, on-the-record eyewitness testimony, the fallen lightpoles remain as 'smoking gun' evidence that the Pentagon attack was a masquerade.

The fallen lightpoles are more pieces of the 9/11 Was An Inside Job puzzle.
Originally Posted by beachnut View Post
Okay, this is dishonest because, using FDR and Radar, it could only be Flight 77 which hit the lampposts. Thus the smoking gun masquerade, is it blatant dishonest. Too lazy to do the work, or dishonest? Too stupid to understand FDR and Radar, or too gullible spewing delusional claptrap from CIT? Could it be unconscious blatant dishonesty (UBD).
At best, you might argue that assertion was disputable but I see no intended dishonesty. I have not read that thread thoroughly but it appears he was reasonably basing his assertion on the testimony of two eyewitness police officers. Myself, I currently tend to agree with David Chandler’s recent posted thoughts which seem to be in agreement with yours. Possibly miragememories now believes differently as well. I have not asked.
Originally Posted by Miragememories View Post
”An easy view of a northern flightpath by 2 cops who are pro-OCT makes for a good case.

The idiots are those who succumb to what what they wish to believe and
continue to ignore evidence to the contrary.”
Originally Posted by beachnut View Post
”..... MM is the idiot who ignores hard evidence from the FDR found in the Pentagon, on the path of destruction which matches the path in the FDR... hello
Thus MM is the one using witness statements, quote-mined hearsay witness statements, aka soft evidence to support BS. And all the CIT witnesses agree it was 77 which hit the Pentagon. oops - kind of more blatant dishonesty because a witness on the ground cannot accurately estimate the flight path of plane. ..”
I thought this was a discussion forum? Where is the dishonesty in pointing out testimony that contradicts the FDR?
Originally Posted by Miragememories View Post
..”When a major report makes such an obvious error on a reference number for a critical parameter, it casts doubt on the reliability of all their critical data.

This is especially true when NIST states that when using their most accurate set of parameters (baseline), they did not achieve collapse initiation in their computer model.

When NIST increased the aircraft speed to 570 mph for the 767 impacting WTC2, combined with other exaggerations to the critical parameters in their more severe case computer model, they finally achieved a successful collapse initiation in their computer model.

NIST created a unique computer model that had no previous history and was developed specifically for the NIST WTC Collapse Report.”
Originally Posted by beachnut View Post
... Blatant quibbler on NIST. Thinks estimate are wrong if they are in different sections and don't match...
Has no clue one person might call 10,000 gallons of jet fuel 60,000 pounds, and another 66,000 pounds, and then a third will quote temperature and give you 67,000 pounds, or apologize they were talking about JPTS, or JP7, or JP4, or ... etc...

MM, offered little or no evidence to support the inside job, and does believe Israel had a hand in it... MM and CIT? wow
Witness statements over hard evidence... illogical
You provide us with a convoluted rant. I see no argument from you that reveals dishonesty on MM’s part.

Originally Posted by ozeco41 View Post
”Since MM is no longer a member the gloves can come off and we can use blunt honesty in describing his performance here.

his dishonesty should become legendary - it set benchmark for those who want to go even lower.

The real challenge should be to raise the level of debate - not seek to emulate MM's sad record.”
I am still waiting to see you present examples of that “legendary dishonesty”?

Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
Since I do not want to receive information from a discredited source, I would be quite interested in reading any fact-based evidence which supports your statement that miragememories was guilty of "legendary dishonesty”.
Originally Posted by GlennB View Post
Since you have direct contact with MM then why not ask him about his 40 years experience in the audio-visual industry?
Ask what??
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 22nd April 2016, 09:39 AM   #252
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 26,122
Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
... I thought this was a discussion forum? Where is the dishonesty in pointing out testimony that contradicts the FDR?
You have no evidence that contradicts the FDR, and there is no testimony which can contradict the FDR. You don't understand the FDR, and you said you went to Balsamo, wait MM went to Balsamo, and got more woo. Balsamo has no clue 77 hit the Pentagon, do you?

Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
... I see no argument from you that reveals dishonesty on MM’s part.
An inability to see his dishonesty might be why you are fooled by claims from 9/11 truth, and go to Balsamo, I mean use MM to go to Balsamo for more woo.

Originally Posted by Miragememories View Post
The question to be asked is; what happened inside the Pentagon?

What is the truth behind the fallen lightpoles?

An honest seeker of the truth cannot dismiss the logical conclusion that a north of Citco flightpath means the fallen lightpoles had to have been planted evidence.

Until you can discredit the north of Citco, on-the-record eyewitness testimony, the fallen lightpoles remain as 'smoking gun' evidence that the Pentagon attack was a masquerade.

The fallen lightpoles are more pieces of the 9/11 Was An Inside Job puzzle.

MM
MM says lamppost were planted, this is dishonesty based on overwhelming ignorance. And you are fooled thinking this is evidence for your inside job fantasy, or refutes the FDR found in the Pentagon. You think this is truth, and you have lies.

MM lies, dishonest, claiming the Pentagon attack was a masquerade. Are you able to understand what MM said is a lie? The FDR and Radar prove him wrong. You failed to refute the FDR and Radar, and all Balsamo your authority can do is lie. He has no clue, like MM.

You claim you went to an aviation authority, it was a lie.
Then MM was used to get your aviation authority, but you can't ask MM for more info? lol

There is no NoC, it was made up by idiots in CIT, the Citizen Idiot Team, Balsamo special branch for investigation. The worse investigators in history, as their witnesses point to the "official flight path" on video.
__________________
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen" - Albert Einstein
"... education as the means of developing our greatest abilities" - JFK
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 22nd April 2016, 11:15 AM   #253
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: USA! USA!
Posts: 24,384
...snip...

Edited by jsfisher:  See Mod box a few posts down.

Last edited by jsfisher; 24th April 2016 at 04:24 PM.
carlitos 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 22nd April 2016, 01:11 PM   #254
ProBonoShill
Master Poster
 
ProBonoShill's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 2,323
Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
At best, you might argue that assertion was disputable but I see no intended dishonesty. I have not read that thread thoroughly but it appears he was reasonably basing his assertion on the testimony of two eyewitness police officers. Myself, I currently tend to agree with David Chandler’s recent posted thoughts which seem to be in agreement with yours. Possibly miragememories now believes differently as well. I have not asked.

I thought this was a discussion forum? Where is the dishonesty in pointing out testimony that contradicts the FDR?

You provide us with a convoluted rant. I see no argument from you that reveals dishonesty on MM’s part.



I am still waiting to see you present examples of that “legendary dishonesty”?




Ask what??
It seems you dodged the below, you do know we all notice when you do that don't you?

Originally Posted by ProBonoShill View Post
Why would you need MirageMemories to ask questions for you? Why couldn't you simply sign up yourself? Also as Beachnut pointed out why is MM only bringing you up now?

You don't think anyone actually believes this ruse do you?

As for Balsamo being an expert on anything, thanks for the laugh, he's a complete idiot and so is MirageMemories for that matter.
__________________
"CD does not prove 9/11 was an inside job. It only proves CD"- FalseFlag
ProBonoShill 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 24th April 2016, 08:32 AM   #255
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 26,122
Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
... I thought this was a discussion forum? Where is the dishonesty in pointing out testimony that contradicts the FDR? ...
There is no testimony which contradicts the FDR. To contradict the FDR you need to show it is wrong, malfunctioned, did not record properly. Someone on the ground can't contradict the FDR.

There are no witnesses on the ground on 9/11 that can contradict the FDR.

Where is the evidence the FDR was contradicted? In Balsamo's mind, a failed aviator who never flew heavy jets, failed to get an ATP. You go to a 9/11 truth nut, Balsamo, who claims 9/11 planes which crashed were still getting messages after they crashed; you found someone insane who believes his fantasy; and you used another 9/11 truth follower who has no evidence to ask a nut, Balsamo, who has no clue what hit the Pentagon.

Go ahead, show me how a witness on the ground can contradict a FDR...

Let us discuss this failure of logic. The FDR is hard evidence, a witness seeing 77 in flight can't change the numbers in the FDR, can't contradict the recording of flight data. This is a fact. The truth is the FDR can contradict a witness, not the other way around.
Get the logic fixed, and you might see the witnesses confirm the FDR; it is the only thing they can do, there is no way to contradict what happened because idiots like Balsamo spin their testimony.

Discuss away, what hit the Pentagon after careful study of all reality based evidence...

Hint, what four planes on 9/11 were never functional after 9/11, the only four heavy class jets who never landed at airports on 9/11... take guess

Balsamo can't figure out what hit the Pentagon; kind of makes him the worse investigator in history, or extremely insane. Balsamo is not the aviation authority you are looking for... he is an idiot.

Discuss what hit the Pentagon; bring all your evidence next time.

Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
I recently conferred with an aviation authority (commercial pilot), about Boeing's Uninterruptible Auto Pilot (BUAP)....
This was funny. A lie, it was miragememories who conferred with Balsamo. Two lies.
How is the remote control going; I don't understand, how did the FDR record flight control inputs by hand, and you say it could be remote control... did they put in a system to fly the plane by moving the controls, and in a way which exposed the terrorists were poor pilots?
The remote control was made to fly poorly? Or was the maneuvers so hard the remote control was needed to fly? Which is it? Discuss -

Which part of the maneuver was too hard for humans to do? Be exact, give bank angle, roll rates, pitch angles, pitch rate, etc.
Discuss -

Describe in great detail why the maneuvers on 9/11 were difficult. Discuss -
__________________
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen" - Albert Einstein
"... education as the means of developing our greatest abilities" - JFK

Last edited by beachnut; 24th April 2016 at 08:37 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
Old 24th April 2016, 04:25 PM   #256
jsfisher
ETcorngods survivor
 
jsfisher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 24,328
Mod WarningAccusations and innuendo regarding past identities of current members have no place in in-thread discussions. Any membership-relevant suspicions can be conveyed by private message to any of the moderation team.
Responding to this modbox in thread will be off topic Posted By:jsfisher
__________________
A proud member of the Simpson 15+7, named in the suit, Simpson v. Zwinge, et al., and founder of the ET Corn Gods Survivors Group.

"He's the greatest mod that never was!" -- Monketey Ghost
jsfisher 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 26th April 2016, 08:16 AM   #257
Criteria
Critical Thinker
 
Criteria's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 470
Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
I thought this was a discussion forum? Where is the dishonesty in pointing out testimony that contradicts the FDR?
Originally Posted by beachnut View Post
”You have no evidence that contradicts the FDR, and there is no testimony which can contradict the FDR.”
I disagree. The eyewitness testimony of Sgt William Lagasse, placed the 77’s flightpath north of the Citgo gas station, thus contradicting the FDR.

Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
”You provide us with a convoluted rant. I see no argument from you that reveals dishonesty on MM’s part.”
Originally Posted by beachnut View Post
”An inability to see his dishonesty might be why you are fooled by claims from 9/11 truth..”
Originally Posted by Miragememories View Post
”What is the truth behind the fallen lightpoles?

An honest seeker of the truth cannot dismiss the logical conclusion that a north of Citco flightpath means the fallen lightpoles had to have been planted evidence.



Until you can discredit the north of Citco, on-the-record eyewitness testimony, the fallen lightpoles remain as 'smoking gun' evidence that the Pentagon attack was a masquerade.

The fallen lightpoles are more pieces of the 9/11 Was An Inside Job puzzle.
Originally Posted by beachnut View Post
”MM says lamppost were planted, this is dishonesty based on overwhelming ignorance.”
No. It is a reasonable conclusion supported by eyewitness testimony.

Originally Posted by beachnut View Post
”And you are fooled thinking this is evidence for your inside job fantasy, or refutes the FDR found in the Pentagon. You think this is truth, and you have lies.”
I am merely questioning the FDR because it appears to be contradicted by testimony from two police eyewitnesses as well as others.

Originally Posted by beachnut View Post
”MM lies, dishonest, claiming the Pentagon attack was a masquerade. Are you able to understand what MM said is a lie? The FDR and Radar prove him wrong. You failed to refute the FDR and Radar, and all Balsamo your authority can do is lie. He has no clue, like MM.”
I am merely trying to understand how it is that police eyewitness testimony contradicts the FDR.

Originally Posted by beachnut View Post
”You claim you went to an aviation authority, it was a lie.
Then MM was used to get your aviation authority, but you can't ask MM for more info? lol

There is no NoC, it was made up by idiots in CIT, the Citizen Idiot Team, Balsamo special branch for investigation. The worse investigators in history, as their witnesses point to the "official flight path" on video.”
I contacted a member of that aviator forum to act on my behalf in order to make a query about BUAP (Boeing Uninterruptible Auto Pilot). In effect, I asked the question, but through a proxy representative of that forum.

Your second sentence is clearly a lie since it was eyewitnesses that stated where they observed 77 and not something CIT conjured up. Your blinding hatred of CIT and any truth that spoils your deep-seated beliefs make it difficult and a waste of time trying to hold a civil discussion with you.

Originally Posted by beachnut View Post
”There is no testimony which contradicts the FDR.”
That is an established lie.

Originally Posted by beachnut View Post
”To contradict the FDR you need to show it is wrong, malfunctioned, did not record properly. Someone on the ground can't contradict the FDR.”
Is not contradictory eyewitness testimony evidence of error? Is it a lie, or dishonest, to believe contradictory eyewitness testimony from police officers?
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 26th April 2016, 08:36 AM   #258
pgimeno
Illuminator
 
pgimeno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,692
Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
No. It is a reasonable conclusion supported by one outlier eyewitness testimony that contradicts most others.
You forgot to include the parts that I've underlined.
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 26th April 2016, 09:34 AM   #259
NoahFence
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 22,131
Quote:
I disagree. The eyewitness testimony of Sgt William Lagasse, placed the 77’s flightpath north of the Citgo gas station, thus contradicting the FDR.
The FDR is leagues more reliable than an eyewitness account.

Quote:
Originally Posted by beachnut View Post
”MM says lamppost were planted, this is dishonesty based on overwhelming ignorance.”
Quote:
No. It is a reasonable conclusion supported by eyewitness testimony.
There's eyewitness testimony that people planted fallen light poles?

Last edited by NoahFence; 26th April 2016 at 09:36 AM.
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 26th April 2016, 10:46 AM   #260
GlennB
Loggerheaded, earth-vexing fustilarian
 
GlennB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wales
Posts: 31,398
Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
I disagree. The eyewitness testimony of Sgt William Lagasse, placed the 77’s flightpath north of the Citgo gas station, thus contradicting the FDR
....
No. It is a reasonable conclusion supported by eyewitness testimony.
The north-of-Citgo flight path would, at its plausible slowest, have involved a bank angle of (iirc) at least 60°. More realistic speeds would have put the plane at an even higher bank angle.

Nobody reported that simply because none of that happened. The testimony is flawed.
__________________
"There ain't half been some clever bastards" - Ian Dury
GlennB 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 26th April 2016, 12:02 PM   #261
Andy_Ross
Penultimate Amazing
 
Andy_Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 47,040
Originally Posted by GlennB View Post
The north-of-Citgo flight path would, at its plausible slowest, have involved a bank angle of (iirc) at least 60°. More realistic speeds would have put the plane at an even higher bank angle.

Nobody reported that simply because none of that happened. The testimony is flawed.
But, the advocates of the north flight path think the aircraft flew over the top and landed somewhere so it wouldn't need to bank.
Andy_Ross 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 26th April 2016, 12:18 PM   #262
GlennB
Loggerheaded, earth-vexing fustilarian
 
GlennB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wales
Posts: 31,398
Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop View Post
But, the advocates of the north flight path think the aircraft flew over the top and landed somewhere so it wouldn't need to bank.
In which case it pretty much flew over a good chunk of DC, starting at nearly ground level. Nobody reported that either

(Back in the bad ol' days of the Loose Change Forum, one joker there seriously suggested it must have had a 'cloaking device' to get away with this. I kid you not)
__________________
"There ain't half been some clever bastards" - Ian Dury
GlennB 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 26th April 2016, 04:15 PM   #263
thedopefishlives
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,696
Originally Posted by GlennB View Post
In which case it pretty much flew over a good chunk of DC, starting at nearly ground level. Nobody reported that either

(Back in the bad ol' days of the Loose Change Forum, one joker there seriously suggested it must have had a 'cloaking device' to get away with this. I kid you not)
Remember, these are Truthers we're talking about here. We have allegations of formation-flying pre-production cruise missiles, sub-basement nukes, and dustification rays from outer space. I doubt there's any form of crazy theory that these folks haven't propounded in an effort to avoid reality.
__________________
Truthers only insist that there must have been some sinister purpose behind [WTC7] because they already think there's a sinister purpose behind everything. -Horatius
thedopefishlives 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 26th April 2016, 04:32 PM   #264
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 26,122
how do you find dumber stuff on 9/11, ask Balsamo or MM

Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
I disagree. The eyewitness testimony of Sgt William Lagasse, placed the 77’s flightpath north of the Citgo gas station, thus contradicting the FDR.
No, CIT says they placed 77 NoC. I have not talked to them. Thus CIT could be the only liars, and at worse the officers are wrong.
You failed to understand, the FDR is the real path, not what witnesses who talk to CIT say. CIT are the dumbest investigators you can find.

Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
No. It is a reasonable conclusion supported by eyewitness testimony.
No, it is an outright lie to say the lamppost are planted, 77 hit them, as witnesses saw them knocked down by 77, and the FDR proves 77 hit them.
But go ahead use witnesses for your BS, ask a witness what knocked down the lampposts, go ahead.
But you don't realize it is a lie, a delusional lie the lamppost were planted; thus miragememories is an idiot, or a liar; take your pick.
Go ahead, refute the FDR, you can't do it.

FDR won. Unless you have evidence it is wrong - and ironically all the witnesses agree 77 hit the Pentagon. now what... quibble time

Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
I am merely questioning the FDR because it appears to be contradicted by testimony from two police eyewitnesses as well as others.
The FDR is hard evidence, it wins. Witnesses are not reliable, however, witnesses support the FDR, but you have to have their complete and unbiased input, and it has to be that day, not the next day, not next year; and you are fooled by testimony filtered by idiots like Balsamo, MM, and CIT. Thus your inability to realize why we use the FDR, why aircraft incident investigators only mean you don't understand the science, and are easy to fool.
The FDR does contradict the testimony, it wins. Don't be upset, it is a fact, not filtered by human senses which are made for walking and running, not flying, not watching 483.5 knot aircraft flying in the air. You don't understand witnesses, and MM can't, and Balsamo is too dumb to figure out 9/11.
Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
I am merely trying to understand how it is that police eyewitness testimony contradicts the FDR.
The FDR wins. And all your witnesses say it hit the Pentagon, and there are more witnesses who match the FDR without having to spin them. 77 flew right over one, and your fail aviation authorities throw her under the bus. I have more witnesses which support the FDR, than you have who don't; and I have your witnesses on video showing your witnesses pointing to the real flight path, the one in the FDR... If you can't figure out 77 hit the Pentagon, like Balsamo - then you ignore reality based on science.


Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
I contacted a member of that aviator forum to act on my behalf in order to make a query about BUAP (Boeing Uninterruptible Auto Pilot). In effect, I asked the question, but through a proxy representative of that forum.

Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
Your second sentence is clearly a lie since it was eyewitnesses that stated where they observed 77 and not something CIT conjured up. Your blinding hatred of CIT and any truth that spoils your deep-seated beliefs make it difficult and a waste of time trying to hold a civil discussion with you.
CIT are idiots or big time liars. Take your pick. They spread lies, or a so dirt dumb stupid, they can't figure out the FDR wins.
I have no deep-seated beliefs, I have the evidence, you have the BS from idiots like CIT, Balsamo who brags his pilots can't hit the Pentagon, and MM who lies about 9/11.
You can't refute the FDR, thus you failed. If you think the witnesses were right, we would a FDR supporting the witnesses;
But you are so shallow in your research, you failed to study hundreds of witnesses... thus my witnesses match the FDR by a factor of 10 to 1; you lost the witness game too; and since you failed to take the time, invest the time, you lost; as you say I hate; nope, I am a pilot trained in aircraft accident investigation, I use fact, you use proxies and fail.



Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
That is an established lie.
The FDR is the truth in this case; thus your witnesses do not contradict the FDR, the FDR contradicts the witnesses. You got it backwards, you have essentially lies of the NoC, and an idiot Balsamo who can't figure out what hit the Pentagon; and inside the Pentagon on 9/11 was DNA, a 757, and a FDR... Radar tracked 77 from take off to impact.

Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
Is not contradictory eyewitness testimony evidence of error? Is it a lie, or dishonest, to believe contradictory eyewitness testimony from police officers?
The FDR wins; are the police spreading lies? CIT are idiots, they are spreading the lies.

When we take witness statements in an aircraft accident, we don't say they are wrong, we take their statements; we collect the Radar data. We don't ask them to draw a flight path...
What we do is take a yard stick, and we go to where they were and we ask them to point to where they saw the plane; we do it right.

You have the cherry picked statements of a fringe few witnesses who fit the BS lies of CIT. You are fooled by liars, CIT, Balsamo, MM, and other 9/11 truth nuts.

Why does the aviation authority Balsamo fail to know 77 hit the Pentagon? Does doubt sell more DVDs? Is Balsamo as dumb as he appears to be, or is he selling lies on DVD?

Why are you so gullible? Do you know 77 hit the Pentagon; all your witnesses know it was 77.

Your aviation authority by the proxy know as miragememories, Balsamo, can't comprehend Radar, and FDR, witnesses, DNA, etc; and has not clue what hit the Pentagon. 14 years of lies from 9/11 truth.

I don't hate CIT, they are the dumbest investigators in history, and are Balsamo's crack team of investigators; a marriage made in ignorance.



In 9/11 truth's delusional, very insane inside job dumbed down for sub-idiots; where do you find idiots to plant downed lampposts when you murder hundreds?
__________________
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen" - Albert Einstein
"... education as the means of developing our greatest abilities" - JFK

Last edited by beachnut; 26th April 2016 at 04:33 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 26th April 2016, 04:34 PM   #265
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,748
Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
I disagree. The eyewitness testimony of Sgt William Lagasse, placed the 77’s flightpath north of the Citgo gas station, thus contradicting the FDR.
Where exactly was Sgt. Lagasse and is this location corroborated by any other witnesses?

I seem to remember he was in his car and possibly under an awning. He didn't actually see the plane approach.
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41

Last edited by DGM; 26th April 2016 at 04:41 PM.
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th April 2016, 04:42 PM   #266
Pinch
Critical Thinker
 
Pinch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 401
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
Where exactly was Sgt. Lagasse and is this location corroborated by any other witnesses?
Lagasse didn't even remember where he was. He had to be corrected on his location at the Citgo by Craig. Not exactly a stunningly confident witness, I'd say.
__________________
"There's this thing about being so "open minded" your brain falls out". --Unknown
Pinch 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 26th April 2016, 04:45 PM   #267
jsfisher
ETcorngods survivor
 
jsfisher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 24,328
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
Where exactly was Sgt. Lagasse and is this location corroborated by any other witnesses?
Lagasse provides his statements on video tape to a truther sometime well after 2001. Lagasse was at the nearby Citgo station at the time.

Interestingly, Lagasse was wrong about where he himself was at the gas station when the plane flew by. Footage from station's surveillance cameras contradict his retelling.
__________________
A proud member of the Simpson 15+7, named in the suit, Simpson v. Zwinge, et al., and founder of the ET Corn Gods Survivors Group.

"He's the greatest mod that never was!" -- Monketey Ghost
jsfisher 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 26th April 2016, 05:14 PM   #268
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 26,122
Did the witness see a reflection? A Shadow?

CIT, the best possible investigators for Balsamo's failed pilots of woo.

Ironically Balsamo is Criteria's aviation authority by miragememories proxy service of woo.

How does 9/11 truth insane fantasy of remote control get idiots to install a covert remote control system on four jets to murder thousands? What a dumb movement
__________________
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen" - Albert Einstein
"... education as the means of developing our greatest abilities" - JFK
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 27th April 2016, 01:15 AM   #269
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: 34,249
Originally Posted by thedopefishlives View Post
Remember, these are Truthers we're talking about here. We have allegations of formation-flying pre-production cruise missiles, sub-basement nukes, and dustification rays from outer space. I doubt there's any form of crazy theory that these folks haven't propounded in an effort to avoid reality.
Well, not quite. None of them seem prepared to adopt the theory, proposed by someone on this forum, that flight 77 flew under the Pentagon.

Dave
__________________
There is truth and there are lies.

- President Joseph R. Biden, January 20th, 2021
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 27th April 2016, 01:37 AM   #270
ozeco41
Philosopher
 
ozeco41's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Moss Vale, NSW, Australia
Posts: 7,617
Originally Posted by beachnut View Post
No, CIT says they placed 77 NoC. I have not talked to them. Thus CIT could be the only liars, and at worse the officers are wrong.
You failed to understand, the FDR is the real path, not what witnesses who talk to CIT say. CIT are the dumbest investigators you can find.

No, it is an outright lie to say the lamppost are planted, 77 hit them, as witnesses saw them knocked down by 77, and the FDR proves 77 hit them.
But go ahead use witnesses for your BS, ask a witness what knocked down the lampposts, go ahead.
But you don't realize it is a lie, a delusional lie the lamppost were planted; thus miragememories is an idiot, or a liar; take your pick.
Go ahead, refute the FDR, you can't do it.

FDR won. Unless you have evidence it is wrong - and ironically all the witnesses agree 77 hit the Pentagon. now what... quibble time

The FDR is hard evidence, it wins. Witnesses are not reliable, however, witnesses support the FDR, but you have to have their complete and unbiased input, and it has to be that day, not the next day, not next year; and you are fooled by testimony filtered by idiots like Balsamo, MM, and CIT. Thus your inability to realize why we use the FDR, why aircraft incident investigators only mean you don't understand the science, and are easy to fool.
The FDR does contradict the testimony, it wins. Don't be upset, it is a fact, not filtered by human senses which are made for walking and running, not flying, not watching 483.5 knot aircraft flying in the air. You don't understand witnesses, and MM can't, and Balsamo is too dumb to figure out 9/11.

The FDR wins. And all your witnesses say it hit the Pentagon, and there are more witnesses who match the FDR without having to spin them. 77 flew right over one, and your fail aviation authorities throw her under the bus. I have more witnesses which support the FDR, than you have who don't; and I have your witnesses on video showing your witnesses pointing to the real flight path, the one in the FDR... If you can't figure out 77 hit the Pentagon, like Balsamo - then you ignore reality based on science.

CIT are idiots or big time liars. Take your pick. They spread lies, or a so dirt dumb stupid, they can't figure out the FDR wins.
I have no deep-seated beliefs, I have the evidence, you have the BS from idiots like CIT, Balsamo who brags his pilots can't hit the Pentagon, and MM who lies about 9/11.
You can't refute the FDR, thus you failed. If you think the witnesses were right, we would a FDR supporting the witnesses;
But you are so shallow in your research, you failed to study hundreds of witnesses... thus my witnesses match the FDR by a factor of 10 to 1; you lost the witness game too; and since you failed to take the time, invest the time, you lost; as you say I hate; nope, I am a pilot trained in aircraft accident investigation, I use fact, you use proxies and fail.

The FDR is the truth in this case; thus your witnesses do not contradict the FDR, the FDR contradicts the witnesses. You got it backwards, you have essentially lies of the NoC, and an idiot Balsamo who can't figure out what hit the Pentagon; and inside the Pentagon on 9/11 was DNA, a 757, and a FDR... Radar tracked 77 from take off to impact.

The FDR wins; are the police spreading lies? CIT are idiots, they are spreading the lies.

When we take witness statements in an aircraft accident, we don't say they are wrong, we take their statements; we collect the Radar data. We don't ask them to draw a flight path...
What we do is take a yard stick, and we go to where they were and we ask them to point to where they saw the plane; we do it right.

You have the cherry picked statements of a fringe few witnesses who fit the BS lies of CIT. You are fooled by liars, CIT, Balsamo, MM, and other 9/11 truth nuts.

Why does the aviation authority Balsamo fail to know 77 hit the Pentagon? Does doubt sell more DVDs? Is Balsamo as dumb as he appears to be, or is he selling lies on DVD?

Why are you so gullible? Do you know 77 hit the Pentagon; all your witnesses know it was 77.

Your aviation authority by the proxy know as miragememories, Balsamo, can't comprehend Radar, and FDR, witnesses, DNA, etc; and has not clue what hit the Pentagon. 14 years of lies from 9/11 truth.

I don't hate CIT, they are the dumbest investigators in history, and are Balsamo's crack team of investigators; a marriage made in ignorance.

[i]In 9/11 truth's delusional, very insane inside job dumbed down for sub-idiots; where do you find idiots to plant downed lampposts when you murder hundreds?
[/I
]
Keep up the good work beachnut - you are still my #1 "Go To" guy for matters aviation.



(and I can filter the occasional slight tendency to hyperbole in your posting style )



Last edited by ozeco41; 27th April 2016 at 01:39 AM.
ozeco41 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

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 02:07 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2024, 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.