ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags 911 conspiracy theory , serial numbers

Reply
Old 18th October 2006, 08:41 PM   #1
alexg
Muse
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 539
serial numbers?

Would someone care to comment on the purported failure to match/find serial numbers from plane parts? I'm totaly in the dark on this one. I can show the pictures of the parts found but seems some CTs want serial numbers.
alexg is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2006, 08:43 PM   #2
Anti-sophist
Graduate Poster
 
Anti-sophist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,542
Serial numbers of what? They don't put serial numbers on rivets.

Furthermore, why would "them" finding serial numbers be proof of anything beyond "them" finding flight data recorders? Claiming the first piece of evidence is a plant is the hard part.. after that, it's easy to just keep throwing evidence out the window.
__________________
A witty saying proves nothing. -Voltaire
Anti-sophist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2006, 08:47 PM   #3
332nd
Penultimate Amazing
 
332nd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,278
I gotta agree with Anti. Serial numbers won't convince them anymore than the flight Data recorders, reamains, and personal effects. If they are relesed they will just claim they were planted or faked.

(I'm dealing with the same thing on another board.)
332nd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2006, 08:48 PM   #4
alexg
Muse
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 539
Here's what the guy is saying

"Again you people prove my point. Here you are trying to deflect the argument into whether the steel was melted or just weak and whether the fire was simply petroleum fueled or how much hotter the office contents would have made it, etc, when you and I know there are much larger issues afoot. Do you think they recovered any serial numbers from any of those 3 sites? Do you really believe all 8 black boxes were destroyed? "

I see your point about having numbers not proving anything to a CTer, yet it would help to have something to tell him. And I don't know if parts are numbered or if matching the numbers is possible. If not I'll tell him that.
alexg is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2006, 08:52 PM   #5
Gravy
Downsitting Citizen
 
Gravy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 17,072
That's hilarious. Who, exactly, are they asking for this information?

Well, why not have some fun with it. Here's an actual serial number from one of the 767s in New York. Tell them it's from the Left-Hand Skyhook.



Better yet, download a Boeing parts list, assign your own serial number to each part, and release it to them as the official list. That should keep them busy for a while.
__________________
"Please, keep your chops cool and don’t overblow.” –Freddie Hubbard

What's the Harm?........Stop Sylvia Browne........My 9/11 links
Gravy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2006, 08:54 PM   #6
Anti-sophist
Graduate Poster
 
Anti-sophist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,542
Uhm, they recovered the FDR from the pentagon and from flight 93, and we have video of the other two planes hitting the buildings. Which planes is he doubting existed?
__________________
A witty saying proves nothing. -Voltaire
Anti-sophist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2006, 08:59 PM   #7
alexg
Muse
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 539
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0469641/...55448#56455448

If somebody wants to come shut up a loudmouth be my guest, he's 'gattboy'. It's IMDB the movie 'World Trade Center'.

ETA He thinks were CIA agents. He's defiling 911.

Last edited by alexg; 18th October 2006 at 09:02 PM.
alexg is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2006, 08:59 PM   #8
Crungy
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 449
Originally Posted by Anti-sophist View Post
Which planes is he doubting existed?
Is this one of those nutters who claim that the planes were actually missiles pimped out to look like commerical air craft? I can't imagine how that project went? Were meeting minutes recorded? Was there a project number that the guy in charge of the paint job could bill his hours to?

Last edited by Crungy; 18th October 2006 at 09:02 PM.
Crungy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2006, 09:00 PM   #9
Arkan_Wolfshade
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,154
Originally Posted by alexg View Post
Here's what the guy is saying

"Again you people prove my point. Here you are trying to deflect the argument into whether the steel was melted or just weak and whether the fire was simply petroleum fueled or how much hotter the office contents would have made it, etc, when you and I know there are much larger issues afoot. Do you think they recovered any serial numbers from any of those 3 sites? Do you really believe all 8 black boxes were destroyed? "

I see your point about having numbers not proving anything to a CTer, yet it would help to have something to tell him. And I don't know if parts are numbered or if matching the numbers is possible. If not I'll tell him that.
A couple of them over at UM have been doing this as well. Since I didn't feel like digging, since I was already involved in enough over here, I went through explaning to them what the "god of the gaps" (argumentum ad ignoratum) is.
Arkan_Wolfshade is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2006, 09:01 PM   #10
Anti-sophist
Graduate Poster
 
Anti-sophist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,542
Originally Posted by Arkan_Wolfshade View Post
A couple of them over at UM have been doing this as well. Since I didn't feel like digging, since I was already involved in enough over here, I went through explaning to them what the "god of the gaps" (argumentum ad ignoratum) is.
Make sure you point out that it's also the core tactic used by Intelligent Design.. and throw in an off-hand comment about how similiar CT and religion is. That tends to really piss them off.
__________________
A witty saying proves nothing. -Voltaire
Anti-sophist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2006, 09:05 PM   #11
bjb
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,079
There are part numbers and serial numbers on pretty much every major component of an aircraft. Not just the black boxes but every electronic box and even mechanical components like hydraulic pumps, actuators, engines and engine parts, etc.

The reason the parts are marked is so they can be tracked. For example, if there's a problem with a given hydraulic pump, similar pumps from the same manufacturer can be located in other aircraft, and the pumps can be pulled and tested to make sure they're ok. Also, the entire history of that failed pump will have been tracked. When and where it was made, when it was installed, where and when it was serviced, etc., all of that information is tracked and stored in a database somewhere.

In the aerospace world, these tracking numbers are part of the traceability of the parts. Here's a company that specializes in products used to mark parts for traceability purposes:

http://www.mecco.com/aerospace_traceability.html

As you can see, pretty much every part on an aircraft can be marked. Even rivets can be marked but they're generally marked for lot traceability, not a specific number for each rivet.
bjb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2006, 09:08 PM   #12
Arkan_Wolfshade
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,154
Originally Posted by bjb View Post
There are part numbers and serial numbers on pretty much every major component of an aircraft. Not just the black boxes but every electronic box and even mechanical components like hydraulic pumps, actuators, engines and engine parts, etc.

The reason the parts are marked is so they can be tracked. For example, if there's a problem with a given hydraulic pump, similar pumps from the same manufacturer can be located in other aircraft, and the pumps can be pulled and tested to make sure they're ok. Also, the entire history of that failed pump will have been tracked. When and where it was made, when it was installed, where and when it was serviced, etc., all of that information is tracked and stored in a database somewhere.

In the aerospace world, these tracking numbers are part of the traceability of the parts. Here's a company that specializes in products used to mark parts for traceability purposes:

http://www.mecco.com/aerospace_traceability.html

As you can see, pretty much every part on an aircraft can be marked. Even rivets can be marked but they're generally marked for lot traceability, not a specific number for each rivet.
And the argument being used, at least by the posters I was dealing with, was that since the gov't has produced no aircraft parts from flight 77 that have serial numbers that can be traced to that aircraft... blah blah blah.
Arkan_Wolfshade is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2006, 09:10 PM   #13
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 17,188
I don't really get the point of supposedly having serial numbers on every dang part of the airplane, the way the Deniers claim. Is there any real point?

"Hey Clem, here's one of the parts of that airplane that crashed!"

"Nah, that there's from t'other plane that crashed here back in '54--see, the serial number is wrong."
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2006, 09:11 PM   #14
alexg
Muse
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 539
Originally Posted by bjb View Post
There are part numbers and serial numbers on pretty much every major component of an aircraft. Not just the black boxes but every electronic box and even mechanical components like hydraulic pumps, actuators, engines and engine parts, etc.

The reason the parts are marked is so they can be tracked. For example, if there's a problem with a given hydraulic pump, similar pumps from the same manufacturer can be located in other aircraft, and the pumps can be pulled and tested to make sure they're ok. Also, the entire history of that failed pump will have been tracked. When and where it was made, when it was installed, where and when it was serviced, etc., all of that information is tracked and stored in a database somewhere.

In the aerospace world, these tracking numbers are part of the traceability of the parts. Here's a company that specializes in products used to mark parts for traceability purposes:

http://www.mecco.com/aerospace_traceability.html

As you can see, pretty much every part on an aircraft can be marked. Even rivets can be marked but they're generally marked for lot traceability, not a specific number for each rivet.

OK, that's good. Not unique numbers to an individual aircraft but to a type of part? Is that correct. If so a SN or part num. would only go to show what? The exact type of part? Possibly used on multiple aircraft. Might narrow it down to belonging to a Boeing, say, vs. something else?
alexg is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2006, 09:24 PM   #15
alexg
Muse
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 539
bjb, rereading your post it sounds like the numbers are unique, is this correct? So a pump part on the plane that was 77 would have a unique number tying it to that plane alone?
alexg is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2006, 09:34 PM   #16
Crungy
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 449
Originally Posted by alexg View Post
bjb, rereading your post it sounds like the numbers are unique, is this correct? So a pump part on the plane that was 77 would have a unique number tying it to that plane alone?
The purpose of a serial number is to uniquely indentify that specific piece of equipment. Using the serial number the equipment manufacturer should be able to obtain specifics of that piece of equipment. When I do a field survey, for any existing equipment, I always jot down the boilerplate info (model number, performance specs, electrical specs and serial number). If the usual boilerplate info is not available, I can call a manufacturer with the serial number, and get my needed info.
Crungy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2006, 09:37 PM   #17
qarnos
Cold-hearted skeptic
 
qarnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,984
It's funny someone should bring this up. There was an article in the Herald Sun newspaper today (link) about a guy who had a bolt from an overflying aircraft fall on his house. They mentioned the bolt had a serial number, but it seems it only allows them to trace it to the aircraft type.
__________________
"In the twenty years since the Chernobyl tragedy, the world's worst nuclear accident, there have been nearly [FILL IN ALARMIST AND ARMAGEDDONIST FACTOID HERE]" - Greenpeace press release.
qarnos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2006, 09:42 PM   #18
Crungy
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 449
Originally Posted by qarnos View Post
It's funny someone should bring this up. There was an article in the Herald Sun newspaper today (link) about a guy who had a bolt from an overflying aircraft fall on his house. They mentioned the bolt had a serial number, but it seems it only allows them to trace it to the aircraft type.
Hmmm. I didn't know that standard mechanical fastners and such were serial numbered for the aviation industry.

I had a friend that worked as an airline mechanic, and he used to tell me horror stories about all of his pot head co-workers who'd finish their shift with plenty of extra parts after they got done reassembling a plane.
Crungy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2006, 09:45 PM   #19
qarnos
Cold-hearted skeptic
 
qarnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,984
Originally Posted by Crungy View Post
Hmmm. I didn't know that standard mechanical fastners and such were serial numbered for the aviation industry.
I re-read the article and it could be that the serial number was just the manufactorers number... the article doesn't make that part clear.

Quote:
I had a friend that worked as an airline mechanic, and he used to tell me horror stories about all of his pot head co-workers who'd finish their shift with plenty of extra parts after they got done reassembling a plane.
I didn't know Ikea made aircraft!
__________________
"In the twenty years since the Chernobyl tragedy, the world's worst nuclear accident, there have been nearly [FILL IN ALARMIST AND ARMAGEDDONIST FACTOID HERE]" - Greenpeace press release.
qarnos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2006, 09:49 PM   #20
CurtC
Illuminator
 
CurtC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 4,785
Originally Posted by Anti-sophist View Post
Uhm, they recovered the FDR from the pentagon and from flight 93
... and the Cockpit Voice Recorder from Flight 93.
CurtC is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2006, 09:53 PM   #21
alexg
Muse
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 539
Originally Posted by qarnos View Post
It's funny someone should bring this up. There was an article in the Herald Sun newspaper today (link) about a guy who had a bolt from an overflying aircraft fall on his house. They mentioned the bolt had a serial number, but it seems it only allows them to trace it to the aircraft type.

hmm, if I buy say, a DVD burner from Sony, it comes with a S/N. I have always assumed that was a unique number, only MY burner has that number. But to connect it to me MY unique identifier ( name, address, CC number) would have to be tied to the burners number. As in the case when I register my product with Sony. I wonder if this is what is done with planes.
alexg is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2006, 11:32 PM   #22
apathoid
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,918
Originally Posted by alexg View Post
OK, that's good. Not unique numbers to an individual aircraft but to a type of part? Is that correct. If so a SN or part num. would only go to show what? The exact type of part? Possibly used on multiple aircraft. Might narrow it down to belonging to a Boeing, say, vs. something else?

I have always assumed that was a unique number, only MY burner has that number. But to connect it to me MY unique identifier ( name, address, CC number) would have to be tied to the burners number. As in the case when I register my product with Sony. I wonder if this is what is done with planes.
I cant believe that CTists are even talking about this. Its just....stupid.

Anyways, yes - most aircraft parts are serialized and its not to tie them to "parent" airplanes. They are serialized for tracking/maintenance purposes. Believe it or not, every serialized part(thousands per airplane) is tracked during that parts life until it is scrapped. When you replace serialized parts for maintenance, the old and new serial numbers are entered in the ships logbook, or routine Job Card and then entered into a maintenance database. So if you find a plane part in your yard that has a dataplate with a Manufacturer Part Number(MPN) - you can find out what type of airplane it came from(ie 767-323) and the effectivity(ie 301-333). If it has a serial number, you can find out what tail number it was last installed on(ie 315).

Almost all Manufacturer Part Numbers are unique to an aircraft type. These numbers can be BACC***(Boeing) numbers or vendor part numbers. We even have company part numbers to eliminate confusion(though it just adds to the confusion). There are also dash(-) numbers that may indicate a different subtype, or effectivity. There can be dozens of dash numbers for a single part number. One of those things mechanics really have to be careful of is installing the wrong part number and its very easy to do with multiple fleet effectivities(we have 15 "types" of 757s and I lost count of the 767's - it's well over 20).

A part may also have many assemblies made of "piece parts", each having a unique part number. For instance, you can order a 767 main landing gear assembly under a single part number, which obviously comes with hundreds of individual parts - or you can order them all individually. One day we actually found the assembly part number for the whole 757 airframe and ordered it just to see what the parts expediditors would say. They had no idea what it was and printed out a "Not In Stock" slip and left it on my toolbox hours later...

Many parts arent serialized(such as fasteners, light bulbs, electrical connectors, insulation blankets, carpet, coffee pots, etc..) and are deemed "free issue" or "throw away". Most anything under $500 is considered throw away and isnt tracked even if its serialized.

I guess the idea is that all the wreckage found at the Pentagon doesnt belong to a 757, or an AA 757, or N644AA......because they wont release the part numbers/serial numbers. Frankly, thats one of the stupidest things I've ever heard. I'm guessing this all got started because a particular denier wanted to sound smart....go figure.
apathoid 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 19th October 2006, 04:45 AM   #23
rearnakedchoke
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 150
matching up serial numbers are rediculous we all saw the planes hit right?

thats one way of looking at it, im not a big CSI guy, but i would imagine one of the first thing you would do is identify what craft impacted where...im sure when a car is crashed and burned they take steps to identify the car, so in a court of law they can say without a shadow of a doubt...YES THIS IS THE CAR...not, we saw it crash so yes this is the car, we dont need to varify that..
rearnakedchoke 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 19th October 2006, 04:53 AM   #24
Ducky
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 11,933
In the course of maintaining an aircraft many parts are replaced. What would an inconsistent serial number prove other than repairs/maintenance?
Ducky 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 19th October 2006, 04:54 AM   #25
MikeW
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,910
Originally Posted by alexg View Post
Would someone care to comment on the purported failure to match/find serial numbers from plane parts?
Where is the evidence for this failure?
MikeW 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 19th October 2006, 04:56 AM   #26
eeyore1954
Philosopher
 
eeyore1954's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 6,433
Originally Posted by apathoid View Post
I cant believe that CTists are even talking about this. Its just....stupid.


I guess the idea is that all the wreckage found at the Pentagon doesnt belong to a 757, or an AA 757, or N644AA......because they wont release the part numbers/serial numbers. Frankly, thats one of the stupidest things I've ever heard. I'm guessing this all got started because a particular denier wanted to sound smart....go figure.

This has always been one of JohnDoes favorite comments. Why didn't they match up the parts. As if they would have faked the DNA evidence but not matched parts if it was important to the supposed coverup.
eeyore1954 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 19th October 2006, 04:56 AM   #27
rearnakedchoke
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 150
Originally Posted by MikeW View Post
Where is the evidence for this failure?
where is the evidence of it not being a failure? this can go on forever...
rearnakedchoke 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 19th October 2006, 04:59 AM   #28
rearnakedchoke
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 150
Originally Posted by eeyore1954 View Post
This has always been one of JohnDoes favorite comments. Why didn't they match up the parts. As if they would have faked the DNA evidence but not matched parts if it was important to the supposed coverup.
what parts we talkin about?...flight 77?

well when you are in charge of a crime scene,lab work, evidence, you can kinda choose what is important..
rearnakedchoke 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 19th October 2006, 05:10 AM   #29
MikeW
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,910
Originally Posted by rearnakedchoke View Post
where is the evidence of it not being a failure? this can go on forever...
Not really. The original poster raised as possibly important a "purported failure" to identify plane components from serial numbers. I'm just asking if there's any substance to that claim, or if someone's just made it up.

So, again, is there any evidence for this failure?
MikeW 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 19th October 2006, 05:12 AM   #30
Lothian
should be banned
 
Lothian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: I try to be a moving target
Posts: 15,134
There are no serial numbers because there were no planes. It was all done by holograms. The real planes were flown to a secret ice cave in the arctic where the passengers had their memories wiped and reprogrammed, before being relocated to a secret town in New Mexico with CIA “husbands” and “wives.”

I know this because I am a paranoid cretin who watches too much TV and can’t diferentiate between fantasy and real life.
Lothian 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 19th October 2006, 05:16 AM   #31
rearnakedchoke
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 150
Originally Posted by Lothian View Post
There are no serial numbers because there were no planes. It was all done by holograms. The real planes were flown to a secret ice cave in the arctic where the passengers had their memories wiped and reprogrammed, before being relocated to a secret town in New Mexico with CIA “husbands” and “wives.”

I know this because I am a paranoid cretin who watches too much TV and can’t diferentiate between fantasy and real life.
feel better now?
rearnakedchoke 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 19th October 2006, 05:18 AM   #32
rearnakedchoke
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 150
Originally Posted by MikeW View Post
Not really. The original poster raised as possibly important a "purported failure" to identify plane components from serial numbers. I'm just asking if there's any substance to that claim, or if someone's just made it up.

So, again, is there any evidence for this failure?
ive read much of the 9/11 report, but not cover to cover, from what i have read of it, i never heard any mention of serial #'s....

if the 9/11 report mentions a serial # match up, please share the link.
rearnakedchoke 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 19th October 2006, 05:24 AM   #33
fuelair
Banned
 
fuelair's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 58,582
Originally Posted by Lothian View Post
There are no serial numbers because there were no planes. It was all done by holograms. The real planes were flown to a secret ice cave in the arctic where the passengers had their memories wiped and reprogrammed, before being relocated to a secret town in New Mexico with CIA “husbands” and “wives.”

I know this because I am a paranoid cretin who watches too much TV and can’t diferentiate between fantasy and real life.

At least you admit it!
fuelair 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 19th October 2006, 05:25 AM   #34
Lothian
should be banned
 
Lothian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: I try to be a moving target
Posts: 15,134
Originally Posted by rearnakedchoke View Post
feel better now?
Better ? I always feel fine, and walk around with an inane lop sided grin,. That along with the halitosis is part of my condition.
Lothian 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 19th October 2006, 05:25 AM   #35
MikeW
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,910
Originally Posted by rearnakedchoke View Post
ive read much of the 9/11 report, but not cover to cover, from what i have read of it, i never heard any mention of serial #'s....

if the 9/11 report mentions a serial # match up, please share the link.
I don't believe it does, however that's not evidence for a "purported failure" as claimed in the original post. (Not knowing if a particular test took place or not is not evidence for the failure of that test.)
MikeW 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 19th October 2006, 05:30 AM   #36
rearnakedchoke
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 150
Originally Posted by MikeW View Post
I don't believe it does, however that's not evidence for a "purported failure" as claimed in the original post. (Not knowing if a particular test took place or not is not evidence for the failure of that test.)
well you're right about that...but lets be honest, its not like you can just call the pentagon and ask if they matched the serial #'s.
rearnakedchoke 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 19th October 2006, 05:33 AM   #37
eeyore1954
Philosopher
 
eeyore1954's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 6,433
If the NTSB matches up part numbers why do they do this? Do you think they do it to ascertain what airplane was in the crash??? Or would it be to try to uncover the cause of the accident. Flight 77 was no accident they didn't need to determine what went wrong with the plane or what mistake the pilots made to cause the crash like in a normal NTSB investigation.
eeyore1954 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 19th October 2006, 05:38 AM   #38
rearnakedchoke
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 150
Originally Posted by eeyore1954 View Post
If the NTSB matches up part numbers why do they do this? Do you think they do it to ascertain what airplane was in the crash??? Or would it be to try to uncover the cause of the accident. Flight 77 was no accident they didn't need to determine what went wrong with the plane or what mistake the pilots made to cause the crash like in a normal NTSB investigation.
everything has a paper trail, to say investigations dont bother with such things sounds kinda odd, imo
rearnakedchoke 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 19th October 2006, 05:40 AM   #39
MikeW
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,910
Originally Posted by rearnakedchoke View Post
well you're right about that...but lets be honest, its not like you can just call the pentagon and ask if they matched the serial #'s.
I think Russell said he'd asked something similar and been refused, have to go check on that... I'm not sure that proves anything, though. If I were in the press office of any US Government body then I'd probably ignore such requests, either, because if you don't they'd never end.

If someone called and asked if they'd matched components, for instance, and they said yes, then it wouldn't end there. They'd just be accused of lying, asked to prove it.

Next up might come pictures of a warehouse full of wreckage. But how's anyone going to prove it's not been faked? Even if you personally visited, looked around, how could you know it really was from a particular flight?

Let's suppose you got some serial numbers, and they turned out to match parts on some audit trail that lead back to Flight 77. That audit trail would just be pieces of paper and computer records, something that I can't imagine would be difficult to fake, and so not everyone would believe those, either.

In other words, if you're someone who already believes the Government has faked/ lied about the retrieval and identification of the passengers from the sites, and the black boxes, then I think you'll probably go on making exactly the same "hoax" and "fake" and "lies" accusations against any other evidence that might appear. Doesn't mean I might not like to see it too, I just don't think any of it will end the argument, not now, not ever.
MikeW 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 19th October 2006, 05:45 AM   #40
rearnakedchoke
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 150
Originally Posted by MikeW View Post
I think Russell said he'd asked something similar and been refused, have to go check on that... I'm not sure that proves anything, though. If I were in the press office of any US Government body then I'd probably ignore such requests, either, because if you don't they'd never end.

If someone called and asked if they'd matched components, for instance, and they said yes, then it wouldn't end there. They'd just be accused of lying, asked to prove it.

Next up might come pictures of a warehouse full of wreckage. But how's anyone going to prove it's not been faked? Even if you personally visited, looked around, how could you know it really was from a particular flight?

Let's suppose you got some serial numbers, and they turned out to match parts on some audit trail that lead back to Flight 77. That audit trail would just be pieces of paper and computer records, something that I can't imagine would be difficult to fake, and so not everyone would believe those, either.

In other words, if you're someone who already believes the Government has faked/ lied about the retrieval and identification of the passengers from the sites, and the black boxes, then I think you'll probably go on making exactly the same "hoax" and "fake" and "lies" accusations against any other evidence that might appear. Doesn't mean I might not like to see it too, I just don't think any of it will end the argument, not now, not ever.
if ALL of the parts matched flight 77 i would start leaning more towards flight 77 hitting the pentagon, and i dont mean the FBI releaseing a report saying "oh by the way the serial #'s matched".
rearnakedchoke 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 03:46 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.