It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by ipsedixit
I have to admit that my own inclination would be to hold fire until I had solid evidence, before making a public announcement about the matter, but she is on the spot, she is an ex-congresswoman, she's not stupid. I'm giving her the benefit of the doubt, until I learn more about the matter.
Originally posted by pinch
If you do nothing then we have the status quo, which is N644AA crashed into the Pentagon.
The FBI had/have the piece-parts to the aircraft, including all the various serial numbers for N644AA and are not releasing the evidence as per standard ongoing-investigation procedures.
Originally posted by SPreston
However the DVD version is a much better quality and helps support more good patriotic investigation into the 9-11 Inside Job Attack On America.
Originally posted by ashamedamerican
There is a reason that airplanes are called fixed wing craft.
They can not fold their wings against their sides like a bird diving into water.
So where is the damage to the pentagon from the wings?
There is none, just a sixteen foot hole.
So flight 77 was the first fixed wing craft in history to fold it's wings against it's sides?
Originally posted by pinch
Bold mine.
One area affecting the potential return on investment in M&S is credibility. Lack of M&S credibility can severely constrain M&S uses - and hence limit the possible payoff from using M&S. Many people consider computer models a new plateau in the art of deception. Brian Arthur, an economist from Stanford University, captures a common perception by noting that, early in his career, he believed "by and large people who couldn't think analytically resorted to computer simulations...[and] that you could prove anything you wanted by tweaking the assumptions deep in your model." Computer M&S are permeating every discipline and are being accepted as necessary tools, but the use of those M&S must be watched carefully.
Further, I am in no way, shape or form prepared to accept Captain Bob's nor his group of aviation "professionals" assurance that his interpretation of the data is accurate.
If Captain Bob was serious about this "simulation" being an accurate and credible representation of events, he would submit the sim to an outside professional organization that is experienced in FDR particulars and simulation development from same. Staying within his own coterie of aviation "professionals" for verification and validation of this sim is nothing but pure nepotism.
Originally posted by SPreston
We let the viewer determine if it is possible for a 757 to navigate such a region and cause the physical damage reported at the Pentagon.
Many common arguments made by those who make excuse for and support the government story are also addressed.
Originally posted by saturnsrings
reply to post by ashamedamerican
There is no public outcry because the sheeple, just want to live in their own little corner of the world. They don't want to even think that our own government, could murder thousands of their citizens, to aid their agenda.
Originally posted by tezzajw
The null hypothesis is that something happened at the Pentagon. We can all agree that there was some type of explosion and damage to the structure.
Anything that attempts to explain this event is an alternate hypothesis that needs proving.
It's so much fun playing with believers. Try a little harder, as you're still not supporting your alternative hypothesis with proof.
Originally posted by Griff
Let me ask you pinch. Where does your faith lie when it comes to the computer simulations of NIST et al for the towers' and wtc 7's collapses without any evidence, physics, or experimental data to back it up?
Again, pure hypocrisy. But, it's A-OK for NIST to do the same with their data and simulations on the towers? Even worse is that as far as I've seen, PFT have their data available for all the world to see. Not so with the government's "findings", eh?
Originally posted by exponent
This is what I am trying to pin down, please show the evidence for alternate hypotheses, and we can see where the balance of evidence lies.
Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
This is completely unnecessary and not our burden of proof.
This isn't an academic discussion.
It is the burden of the government to provided enough evidence prove the official story and they have failed.
Furthermore P4T and CIT present enough information to prove the official story false.
If that's not enough to get you to join us in demanding an end to the fraudulent "war on terror" and demanding full congressional hearings and indictments of those in control of the U.S. military that were involved then it's clear your priorities are mixed up to say the least.
Originally posted by exponent
Furthermore, Pilots For Truth charge for DVDs and similar, they are raising funds in this manner. NIST do nothing of the sort.
Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
it's clear that if you were a true skeptic who was against the war on terror that you should be helping to highlight and promote the evidence we have uncovered while demanding a response from both the U.S. and British governments.
Originally posted by exponent
Here is the crux of your point. Typically a fallacy.
"You either agree with us, or you don't believe in truth".
I am aware NIST were funded in order to complete their investigation, they also undertook actual simulation, actual testing and actual work. I appreciate that you have, and I understand that in fact you may well have costs to consider. Pilots For Truth do not, they have presented a disingeous model and despite claiming they would release the 3d data I have yet to see it (had a quick look through their forums with no joy).
No sir, I was far more comfortable believing the official theory was the correct one. The fact that the many coincidences that had to fall perfectly in place that day, for the whole government explanation to work has to be billions to one. Perhaps trillions to one. But then again, there are millions that claim the government can't keep a secret. Yet they did a fine job with the Manhattan project.
Originally posted by jthomas
Originally posted by saturnsrings
reply to post by ashamedamerican
There is no public outcry because the sheeple, just want to live in their own little corner of the world. They don't want to even think that our own government, could murder thousands of their citizens, to aid their agenda.
If you can't provide any evidence after seven years, then we have to believe you are deluding yourself that the government was behind 9/11.
Perhaps you find comfort in the Official 9/11 Truth Movement Fairy Tale.
Originally posted by exponent
I am aware NIST were funded in order to complete their investigation,