9/11 What evidence would make you believe in a conspiracy?

Originally posted by jfj123
[I would suggest finding another pilots name to drop for credibility purposes.

Please show me any infomration that debates Mr. Lears credibility as a pilot.

I will be waiting.

reply to post by ULTIMA1


ULTIMA, (apologies to jfj)

There is no discounting Capt. Lear's accomplishments.

I have seen him post all of his type-ratings.

I will never discount Capt Lear's ability to fly. I respect the man for his flying abilities.

Some of his claims, though....I must take with some salt.....although I am slowly being convinced of a few.

Reason I can understand Capt Lear is because, I have flown also. Almost 22 years at a major airline, I am type-rated on the DC-9/MD-80, the B737 and the B757/767.

In addition, I have flown right seat on the B727, the Airbus -300, and the DC-10.

Before I got hired, at the major airline....I flew for various 'commuter' airlines.....including a stint flying for Scenic Airlines, doing Grand Canyon tours...back then, they had Cessna 402s and 404s .... and one Ford Tri-Motor....which JL said he flew. I asked him about 'Hank', who also flew for Scenic at the time (late 1980s) who also flew the Tri-Motor.....never got a clear answer.

Well, I've gone off-topic....just a memory lapse....

I am in a thread about 9/11, but I am trying to give some bonafides....for me.


[edit to add...ULTIMA didn't ask me the question, but I answered it anyway!]

Hope it doesn't offend you, ULTIMA!


[edit on 6/2/0808 by weedwhacker]

Originally posted by weedwhacker
I will never discount Capt Lear's ability to fly. I respect the man for his flying abilities.

Some of his claims, though....I must take with some salt.....although I am slowly being convinced of a few.

Well if you read my post i am only talking about his flying skills for now not the other theories he has posted, CORRECT ?

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by jfj123

 

jfj....you misunderstood me.....I didn't drop JL's name as a compliment to him.

Thank you for pointing out some of the things he 'believes' in....

Sorry, the comment was meant for ultima.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Sorry if this seems too much info. Pilots just understand, through experience. It takes time to explain, to non-pilots.

Please do not try to talk down to me. Yes i understand, as stated that pilots go by what they have trained to go the instruments.

As stated and shown pilots my know what instuments tell them but usually do not know about the inner workings of a aircraft.

Do you have any evidence, beside your opinion that Mr. Lear is not correct in his statement?

[edit on 2-6-2008 by ULTIMA1]

My personal impression is that he was not trying to talk down to you but explain to someone with less experience, how things work in his industry. I personally found his post to be very easy to understand and informative. I'd be surprised if anyone on this thread has the experience he does and I for one am very happy he is so willing to share it with us without reservation or condition.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by jfj123
[I would suggest finding another pilots name to drop for credibility purposes.

Please show me any infomration that debates Mr. Lears credibility as a pilot.

I will be waiting.

His credibility is in doubt due to his extreme imaginary viewpoints. I can give you one example.

In another thread, mr. lear posted a picture showing a 767 and overlayed it onto the WTC hole created by the plane crash then went on to explain that the hole is the wrong shape for the plane so obviously there could have been no plane. Thus the NO PLANE HYPOTHESIS.
Here's the problem-His picture was of a standard 767 with wings in a standard position and not flexed up under the stress from the angle it was flying. If you adjust his picture for the change in wing position due to the angle of flight, it fits into the hole perfectly. Seems to me that someone with his credentials shouldn't have been caught up in something so basic by someone with admittedly not many credentials when it comes to aviation.

So there's your information.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by Straight Razor
Actual evidence rather than pathetic fiction.

I have been asking for actual evidence for years. But seems like the people that still beleive the official story are not looking for evidence because that might prove the officaial story wrong.



[edit on 2-6-2008 by ULTIMA1]

1) I would think someone who claims to work at the NSA would be able to spell, something you have consistently proven to be unable to do.

2) It's funny how you can take what you say above and reverse it and it fits you perfectly.

3) Still waiting for the proof of your accusations about me and for you to answer my questions coward.

[edit on 2-6-2008 by scottie18]

Originally posted by jfj123
His credibility is in doubt due to his extreme imaginary viewpoints. I can give you one example.

Please answer the simple question i posted.

Please show me any infomration that debates Mr. Lears credibility as a pilot.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by jfj123
His credibility is in doubt due to his extreme imaginary viewpoints. I can give you one example.

Please answer the simple question i posted.

Please show me any infomration that debates Mr. Lears credibility as a pilot.

I am well aware of Mr. Lear's credentials and I am in not way attempting to minimize them but when I did answer your simple question, it was to point out that nobody is perfect and everyone can make mistakes including Mr. Lear. I'm not interested in starting a John Lear Bashing thread. That being said, I did answered your simple question by giving you an example of something I directly experienced with Mr. Lear. Try re-reading the rest of the post you cut and pasted out of and you'll have you answer.


In any case, we're discussing 9/11 events and evidence that would make you believe in a conspiracy.
Although I have seen gaps in reports, potentially missing facts, etc... I haven't seen any evidence to directly suggest a conspiracy involving our government.

I would personally like to see physical evidence such as:
If Controlled Demo happened, some bits and pieces of the explosive devices left over.

If flight 93 was shot down, I'd like to see missile debris.

etc...


[edit on 3-6-2008 by jfj123]

reply to post by jfj123


Exactly the sort of evidence that is missing to date. The best efforts seem to be attempts to 'skew' the existing data to make it lean toward conspiracy but close examination eventually reveals it as misinformation.

If I'm seeing any hint of conspiracy it's one against the government, not by it and it's post 9/11 not pre 9/11.

Originally posted by jfj123
Although I have seen gaps in reports, potentially missing facts, etc... I haven't seen any evidence to directly suggest a conspiracy involving our government.

So please tell me how can you still believe the official story when you have no aactual evindece and there are so many questions still unanswered?

Also i am not looking for a conspiracy i am looking for the thruth of what happened, the only conpiracy is the what the official story is based on.

Originally posted by Pilgrum
Exactly the sort of evidence that is missing to date. The best efforts seem to be attempts to 'skew' the existing data to make it lean toward conspiracy but close examination eventually reveals it as misinformation.

Actually there is evidnece but the beleivers like to try to SKEW it to make it lean towards the official conspiracy.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by jfj123
Although I have seen gaps in reports, potentially missing facts, etc... I haven't seen any evidence to directly suggest a conspiracy involving our government.

So please tell me how can you still believe the official story when you have no aactual evindece and there are so many questions still unanswered?

Some gaps in evidence doesn't mean NO evidence.

In this particular case, I subscribe to Occam's razor which states:

"All other things being equal, the simplest solution is the best."

In other words, when multiple competing theories are equal in other respects, the principle recommends selecting the theory that introduces the fewest assumptions and postulates the fewest entities.

Here's an interesting link

www.debunking911.com...

It discusses how molten metal could have stayed molten for weeks after the collapse. I'd post snippets but it would be out of context and the explanation if very in depth. If you guys have a chance to review it, let me know what you think.

Thanks to everybody for all the great posts in this thread !!!!

Great article. Thanks for posting it

I'll have to read some of the other things he has available.

I agree, excellent article. It does a good job explaining things with both chemistry and thermodynamics.

With the shear amount of energy involved in the collapse of the two towers (and that it wasn't released uncontrolled like a bomb), it makes sense that it would have been transferred into a substantial amount of heat; enough to theoretically cause some pockets of steel to melt.

Keep up the good finds!

The only new evidence you will ever need from 9-11 is that 9-11=11/11 which equals magick and that 3,000 plus was "MURDERED/SACRIFICED" under the SUN!

The twin towers were built right outside the lining of when the sun rose,very sad that all them people had to be sacrificed to THE SUN.

as the sun was shinning so bright,3,000 people were SACRIFICED....

Soooo sad.

Originally posted by jfj123
Some gaps in evidence doesn't mean NO evidence.

Actually there is no real evidence to support the official story.

The biggest evidence against the official story is the lack of evidence that supports it.

Originally posted by jfj123
Here's an interesting link

And people say i post from biased sites!

Do you have any other sources to verify the information from that site? Because i normally try to verify infomration and use more the 1 source.

Which part did you think inaccurate? Perhaps we can come up with another source for you.