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 Kryties
The one thing I have noticed about all of CIT's threads is the re-occurrance of several members who seem hell-bent on disproving CIT's theories. One might even see it as some sort of 'gang-mentality' - they feed off each others enthusiasm to disprove CIT.
Now I consider myself to be a logical, intelligent person and I have to admit I see merit in the CIT investigation. It seems to me that these certain 'over-enthused' members overlook some of the more convincing evidence and try to nail down their argument by consistently hounding CIT and any other person who DARES to entertain the thought that perhaps CIT is right with the little tid-bits that they have successfully managed to disprove.
Sorry for the rant, just thought that needed to be said. Keep up the good work CIT
Originally posted by matrixNIN11
Originally posted by Kryties
The one thing I have noticed about all of CIT's threads is the re-occurrance of several members who seem hell-bent on disproving CIT's theories. One might even see it as some sort of 'gang-mentality' - they feed off each others enthusiasm to disprove CIT.
Now I consider myself to be a logical, intelligent person and I have to admit I see merit in the CIT investigation. It seems to me that these certain 'over-enthused' members overlook some of the more convincing evidence and try to nail down their argument by consistently hounding CIT and any other person who DARES to entertain the thought that perhaps CIT is right with the little tid-bits that they have successfully managed to disprove.
Sorry for the rant, just thought that needed to be said. Keep up the good work CIT
I for one think its high time certain detractors and anti CIT's should just be banned at this point.
they contribute nothing other than sarcasm and anything but healthy or sincere skepticism.
isn't it obvious to the mods?
even though i'm sure i'll be attacked and flamed for this opinion, What i'm suggesting isn't really raw censorship in this case... nor is it suppression of intelligent discourse since posters like cameron and his merry men have crossed what i call the line of logic, rationale and objective critical/respectful debate.
way too much bandwidth is being wasting going in circles with these individuals who deny facts and cointinually have zero evidence to support their claims and baseless assertions.
am i wrong?
Originally posted by CameronFox
Missing? Really? Because a fist full of conspiracy theorists wants S/N's you call them missing?
Did you ever read the data from the FDR from flight 77? It actually has the information of the flight on 9/11 AND the previous flight. Why would it be necessary for the S/N to be there? It was shown above that not ALL FDR S/N's are recorded.
# American Airlines Flight 77 Pentagon
# 9/11/01 Boeing 757 N644AA
# Revision: January 28 2002 January 29 2002
# National Transportation Safety Board
# Date Printed: January 29 2002
# American Airlines Flight 77 Pentagon 9/11/01 Boeing 757 N644AA
# Revision: January 28 2002 January 29 2002 National Transportation Safety Board
# Date Printed: January 29 2002
Eastern
Daylight
Time
(hh:mm:ss)
8:19:00
Originally posted by CameronFox
Originally posted by PplVSNWO
This thread is not about all of those other things, there are already mountains of threads discussing those topics.
I am responding to post from Mr. CIT. I agree though. Too many threads dealing with the same stuff.
[snip]
I will have to disagree with you. There are no flyover witnesses. This was a statement by a man who states what he said some others were saying.
Negative proof, the fallacy of appealing to lack of proof of the negative, is a logical fallacy of the following form: "X is true because there is no proof that X is false." It is asserted that a proposition is true, only because it has not been proven false. The negative proof fallacy often occurs in the debate of the existence of supernatural phenomena, in the following form: "A supernatural force must exist, because there is no proof that it does not exist". However, the fallacy can also occur when the predicate of a subject is denied: "Religious people haven't been able to produce conclusive evidence to support the existence of a "God", therefore such a being must not exist."
The argument from ignorance, also known as argumentum ad ignorantiam ("appeal to ignorance" [1]) or argument by lack of imagination, is a logical fallacy in which it is claimed that a premise is true only because it has not been proven false or is false only because it has not been proven true.
Originally posted by rush969
Originally posted by Swing Dangler (SD)
(SD)"""The 'official evidence is precisely what has given rise to private
investigations!! Don't you get it?"""
And are you not able to grasp that the first OBVIOUS thing that all the people involved in this GIANT conspiracy would have to do is to make sure ALL THE EVIDENCE would perfectly MATCH THE OFFICIAL STORY???!!!
(SD)"""For example, you must be forced to believe that the plane flew over the Pentagon and over the light poles because the Flight Data Recorder from the plane says it was too high to impact! Welcome to the fly over club as started by the flight data recorder itself."""
Isn´t it OBVIOUS to you that IF there had been a flyover, the parties involved would NOT HAVE let this information be known???!!!
Would you be so dumb as to provide the information that shows you have lied and are guilty of multiple homicide and treason to your Country?
(SD)"""No explosive sounds? Now your calling firefighters, first responders, victims liars, those who first reported explosives going off were you guess it, the mainstream media...CNN, FOX, etc, before the propaganda machine set in."""
They were the first ones who reported it and now you want to play debunker historical revisionist by stating "conspiracy theorists" started this??
WASN´T MAINSTREAM MEDIA IN ON IT??? Make up your minds please.
Of course that phrase "before the propaganda machine set in" makes it all good doesn´t it. PLLEEAASE!!!
[edit on 26-1-2009 by rush969]
[edit on 26-1-2009 by rush969]
Originally posted by hooper
Originally posted by Swing Dangler
Originally posted by GenRadek
reply to post by Swing Dangler
not when you have the entire aircraft entering the building. The tail goes in after, then don't forget the partial collapse of the front of the affected area. The velocity of the black box will still be the same as the aircraft's initial velocity at impact. So it will still move forward anyways.
And again, we have no explanation how the 757 debris ended up inside the Pentagon to begin with and how CIT explains how people managed to "plant" everything in front of hundreds of commuters, eyewitnesses, search & rescue teams, TV crews, first responders, etc, without anyone noticing. This is another untied string in the CIT "Flyover" fantasy.
One, the tail would have been sheered off on impact but no tail debris can be found. Really? You looked? How do you prove a statement like that?
It certainly didn't enter the building because where the tail should have been, no identation marks of any sort can be found. The building was made of silly putty?
So your suggesting then the FDR did not suffer a loss of velocity upon impact? In violation of physics, correct?
We already know there are conflicting accounts about who discovered the FDR and where they discovered it. Not only that, you claim the "flyover" is a fantasy, but YOU MUST ACCEPT IF YOU ACCEPT THE ALLEGED OFFICIAL FDR. The official FDR has the plane too high to hit the light poles and too high to hit the Pentagon.
There is no way around it. Your caught accepting official evidence that proves the OCT wrong.
Secondly, you can read several accounts about anonymous individuals and 'fake' firefighters on the scene at the Pentagon. No one has any clue what they were doing there and they were all acting very strangely.
So as far as planting evidence, all these people are immediately suspect. So you contend that it was possible for people to sneak around and plant plane and body parts without anyone noticing and your proof of this "theory" is that people were seen doing this?
You can read more here:Imposters at the Pentagon
Independent contractors were operating in the area at the time, all of who would be suspect. As far as planting parts, its not that difficult in an emergency such as that.
Originally posted by rush969
reply to post by Swing Dangler
So...let me see if I can get this right.
First, AA77 didn´t crash at the Pentagon, right?
But we have a Flight Data Recorder, right?
And that recorder proves to us that the plane was too high to be able to crash at the Pentagon, right?
Whose Data Recorder is that? AA77? Are we proving that AA77 flew over the Pentagon?
So then: What happened to AA77?
And specially: How can the perps, be SO STUPID as to provide recorder data that proves they are lairs???
Let me put it another way: If you had fired that “alleged missile” at the Pentagon, wouldn´t you put the recorder INSIDE IT, to record the correct parameters???
TALK ABOUT COMMON SENSE!!!
Originally posted by CameronFox
Originally posted by SPreston
However, on 9-11 we had 4 US aircraft missing serial numbers for 8 black boxes,
Missing? Really? Because a fist full of conspiracy theorists wants S/N's you call them missing?
Did you ever read the data from the FDR from flight 77? It actually has the information of the flight on 9/11 AND the previous flight. Why would it be necessary for the S/N to be there? It was shown above that not ALL FDR S/N's are recorded.
Originally posted by Swing Dangler
Now if they had been truly smart bad guys, they would have claimed the box was never found, but hard to do in such a small environement compared to say the WTC complex.
Although there is some eyewitness accounts they were discovered and turned over to guess who? The FBI! Imagine that. It is hard to claim a lost or destroyed box at the Pentagon. Too small of an area, lack of collapsing towers, etc.
This statement caught my attention. "Hard to claim the box was never found (or destroyed for that matter), in such a small environment"!!!!
Yet, what actually happened was that the recorder was planted, along with damaged airplane parts, charred human remains, and some belongings of people who were passengers of AA77 on that day.
That´s not hard to do, right?!!!
And that phrase, """if they had been truly smart bad guys""".
What does that mean?
Are you claiming that the FBI are the bad guys, and that they are dumb as bad guys?
The FBI is part of the conspiracy behind 9/11, but they don´t have intelligent enough special agents to carry out such a simple task as figuring out that the FDR should NOT BE discovered or read?
REALLY???
[edit on 28-2-2009 by rush969]
[edit on 28-2-2009 by rush969]
posted by rush969
The FBI is part of the conspiracy behind 9/11, but they don´t have intelligent enough special agents to carry out such a simple task as figuring out that the FDR should NOT BE discovered or read?
REALLY???
Originally posted by SPreston
Perhaps none of the 'special agents' knew how to decipher (decode) the Flight Data Recorder. Perhaps an agent was just handed the FDR by a mystery person and ordered to plant it where he thought best. So he dropped it on his own sooty footprints out by the Exit Hole, not realizing the FDR was showing much too high an altitude.
Maybe that mystery person was not his friend and was slyly on the other side, tricking that 'special agent' into doing what he should not. Perhaps that 'special agent' is pushing up daisies somewhere as a reward.
UhhOhhh!! Much much much too high. Somebody goofed.
[edit on 2/28/09 by SPreston]
Posted by Swing Dangler:
Originally posted by rush969