9/11 even real pilots couldn't do it

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade

Originally posted by TiffanyInLA

And then when I said that it was your contention that a majority of the aviation community do think there was something suspicious about it you said that I was constructing one of your famous "strawmen".

That is not what you said.

Really? Let's have a look...

For example, if it's your contention that most pilots believe what the planes did was impossible,

Yet another strawman.

During your above post you take issue with my contention that most pilots do not agree with you, and then you say it's a "strawman" when I say that you think that most pilots do agree with you!

First you claim my "contention" is that most pilots think it's "impossible". I never made such a claim/contention. You fabricated this claim as you do all your other strawmans. You then later changed your wording from "impossible" to "suspicious".

Either you intentionally twist your own words, or you have no clue of what you write. Which is it?

It is either true that a majority of pilots agree with you or you that they don't.

Agreed. And we will never know till all pilots are polled after reviewing the data thoroughly.Those which have reviewed the information, question the OS, call for a new investigation and the list is growing.

Let us know when you get one verified pilot to agree with you. You've been failing for 69 pages.

What does it matter what "I think"? Are you interested in facts or opinion?

Both. As are you.

Put it this way, it is apparently Bob and Russ and the P4T boys' opinion that the flights were impossible. I am interested in whether that opinion is shared by a majority of aviation professionals. It seems not. And it also seems that you can't make up your mind about whether it is or not.

It appears you are not familiar with the concept of an Expert Witness. Let me help you with that -

An expert witness, professional witness or judicial expert is a witness, who by virtue of education, training, skill, or experience, is believed to have expertise and specialised knowledge in a particular subject beyond that of the average person, sufficient that others may officially and legally rely upon the witness's specialized (scientific, technical or other) opinion about an evidence or fact issue within the scope of his expertise, referred to as the expert opinion, as an assistance to the fact-finder.[1] Expert witnesses may also deliver expert evidence about facts from the domain of their expertise.[2]

Source

As for my personal opinion? What does it matter when there is a growing list of verified expert witnesses?

Let us know when you get some evidence and/or just one verified expert witness for your argument to rebut mine as you have been failing for 69 pages and "rebuttable presumption" indicates you lost long ago.

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
Yes, I'm losing.

You lost long ago.

You say you have evidence that concludes that the planes were modified or not real.

Ugh, another strawman.


You need to read my argument again. It's been posted on every page at least once. Where exactly does it say in my argument below that my evidence "concludes that the planes were modified or not real".?

(hint - actually read the argument in parenthesis this time)

After SIXTY-NINE pages, the score remains -

Evidence for my argument (Reported speeds/control "impossible", "improbable", "The Elephant In The Room") -

Data -
NTSB
Boeing
Limits set by the manufacturer based on flight/wind tunnel testing
Illustrated Guide To Aerodynamics
NASA Research


Precedent -
EA990
China Air 747SP
TWA 727
737
Modified DC-8

All suffered in flight structural failure, crash and/or lost control and needed 10's of thousand of feet to recover, well below Vmo+150.... or was modified to exceed it's manufacturer's set limits in the case of the DC-8.

Numerous verified experts - (Many posted in this thread - www.abovetopsecret.com...), more listed here.



Evidence for the argument of those who blindly support the OS ("It is easy to control an aircraft at Vmo+150") -

"Because the govt told me so..."

Data = N/A
Precedent = N/A
Verified Experts = N/A


Again -


Please let us know when you find one verified pilot willing to support your claims that it is "easy" to control a 767 at Vmo+150, Va+220 --and pull G's-- out of a 10,000+ foot dive, while rolling on G's cranking into a 38 degree bank, to hit a target with less than a 25' margin for error - for a pilot with less experience than one who couldn't control a 172 at 65 knots. Please let us also know when you have any type of evidence for your argument other than assumption or "Because the govt told me so...". You have been failing for more than NINE years.

reply to post by TiffanyInLA


World Population - 6,697,000,000 +/-

"Patriots" = 3070 +/-

% of population that IS NOT a "patriot" = 99.99995%

Yeah, thats pretty much everyone.

Sorry.

Originally posted by hooper
World Population - 6,697,000,000 +/-

"Patriots" = 3070 +/-

% of population that IS NOT a "patriot" = 99.99995%

Yeah, thats pretty much everyone.

Sorry.

Sept 11 Attack Opinion Polls

46% of the worlds population agrees with you that "Al Qaeda" performed the attacks.

The rest either question the attacks, feel someone other than Al Qaeda" was responsible, or wasn't convinced by the OS.

You are in the minority hooper.

Given the list of evidence above with respect to this topic alone, you have 0.0000% expert support for your argument from a verified expert.

Originally posted by TiffanyInLA

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
Yes, I'm losing.

You lost long ago.

Sorry, Tiffany, but it's blatantly obvious you're severely being spanked by Trickoftheshade here, and I don't mean in a kinky way. It's been pointed out ad nauseum that the Pentagon is in the middle of an industrial park and hordes of eyewitnesses specifically saw what it was that hit the Pentagon, not to mention, the recovery of wreckage of the plane including the black box identifying it as flight 77, as well as DNA from the remains of the passengers known to have been on flight 77. That's not even mentioning the crew of the C-130 who saw the whole thing from a ring side seat above the Pentagon.

There is an overweighing amount of evidence showing you that regardless of whatever else happened on 9/11, it really was flight 77 that hit the Pentagon. All YOU have to counter this is your reliance on make believe accusations of planted evidence, never ending processions of secret agents, and the occasional rare pilot who in no small coincidence happen to agree with what you yourself want to believe. If you need to resort to calculating out g-force strains and specific thrust to weight ratios to locate this conspiracy you're "so sure" is there, this isn't research. This is a mark of extreme desperation on your part to refuse to acknowledge that you're barking up the wrong tree with this bit.

At the end of the day, all you're doing is trying to convince us that it's impossible for an inexperienced pilot to crash an airplane. You do know that, right?

reply to post by GoodOlDave


Now you may want to actually read the thread as we are talking about the WTC attack, not the Pentagon.

reply to post by TiffanyInLA

46% of the worlds population agrees with you that "Al Qaeda" performed the attacks.

The rest either question the attacks, feel someone other than Al Qaeda" was responsible, or wasn't convinced by the OS.

You are in the minority hooper.

Given the list of evidence above with respect to this topic alone, you have 0.0000% expert support for your argument from a verified expert.

Wow! All that and yet....nothing. No "investigation", no interest, nada.

Here I am, wallowing in the "minority" and yet the so-called "majority" does, well, nothing.

Now, we can conclude one of two things -

A) You're wrong about....well just about everything.

OR

B) The majority just ain't what it used to be.

Originally posted by hooper
Wow! All that and yet....nothing. No "investigation", no interest, nada.

"No interest"?

You obviously haven't been paying attention.


hooper, I know you would rather derail the topic due to the fact you cannot discuss the data and facts, but please try to keep your derailment's to a minimum as readers will start to see a pattern with you as do the Admin's.

Anytime you wish to get some evidence for your argument, let us know hooper. IIRC, I predicted that this thread would go out to 100+ pages, and you and your obfuscation brigade will have not been able to provide any evidence nor a verified expert for your argument. We're more than half way there.

reply to post by TiffanyInLA


And exactly what is "my" argument?

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by TiffanyInLA

 

And exactly what is "my" argument?

Actually, you're right. You don;t have one. You just come here to derail.

By the way, it wasn't me who predicted 100 pages of obfuscation, it was VirginiaRisesYetAgain, on page 25.

He has you guys pegged.

Originally posted by TiffanyInLA
46% of the worlds population agrees with you that "Al Qaeda" performed the attacks.

The rest either question the attacks, feel someone other than Al Qaeda" was responsible, or wasn't convinced by the OS.

You are in the minority hooper.

If you're going to quote this poll then quote it correctly. For every one person who believes the US gov't was behind 9/11, there are THREE who acknowledge it was al Qaida, and for everyone who insists the US gov't was behind it, there's someone else who thinks it's the Jews, secret cults of Satan worshipping numerologists, shape shifing alien lizards, and god knows what else is being conjured up. That doesn't tell me the "al qaida attack" supporters are in the minority. It tells me the conspiracy people are just using this as an outlet to air whatever particular angst they have so they're getting into fistfights with each other over who was really behind this "blatantly a conspiracy". Gee, a Palestinian whose son was killed by Israeli soldiers thinks Israel is evil enough to stage the attack to instigate a war against muslims. What are the odds?

I note the next largest majority is the people who don't know who was responsible, meaning that although they may not accept the idea it was Al Qaida, they likewise reject these preposterous conspiracy claims. That makes YOU a minority among minorities.

The one thing this shows is crystal clear clarity? You're grasping.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
If you're going to quote this poll then quote it correctly. For every one person who believes the US gov't was behind 9/11, there are THREE who acknowledge it was al Qaida, and for everyone who insists the US gov't was behind it, there's someone else who thinks it's the Jews, secret cults of Satan worshipping[sic] numerologists, shape shifing[sic] alien lizards, and god knows what else is being conjured up. That doesn't tell me the "al qaida attack" supporters are in the minority. It tells me the conspiracy people are just using this as an outlet to air whatever particular angst they have so they're getting into fistfights with each other over who was really behind this "blatantly a conspiracy". Gee, a Palestinian whose son was killed by Israeli soldiers thinks Israel is evil enough to stage the attack to instigate a war against muslims[sic]. What are the odds?

I note the next largest majority is the people who don't know who was responsible, meaning that although they may not accept the idea it was Al Qaida, they likewise reject these preposterous conspiracy claims. That makes YOU a minority among minorities.

The one thing this shows is crystal clear clarity? You're grasping.

Are you saying this statement is inaccurate?

Originally posted by TiffanyInLA
"46% of the worlds population agrees with you that "Al Qaeda" performed the attacks."

Have you figured out that we are arguing the WTC attack based on the above listed evidence yet? And not the Pentagon?

How can you declare Tricky "spanked" me when you don't even know what is being argued?



You are a prime example when I say "those who blindly support the OS".

Thanks Dave!

Anytime you wish to discuss the topic and perhaps provide evidence for the argument of your cohorts, let us know, they been failing for 69 pages.

Originally posted by TiffanyInLA


First you claim my "contention" is that most pilots think it's "impossible". I never made such a claim/contention.

Either you intentionally twist your own words, or you have no clue of what you write. Which is it?

Ironic, coming from someone who uses the terms "improbable" and "impossible" interchangeably.

But it doesn't matter. You're trying to wriggle away from the fact that you know that I'm not putting words in your mouth. You either acknowledge that most pilots don't agree with you, or you think that they do. It's not difficult.

And if you don't think that most pilots think it impossible, that must mean that you think most pilots consider it possible. In which case why are you bothering?

Agreed. And we will never know till all pilots are polled after reviewing the data thoroughly.Those which have reviewed the information, question the OS, call for a new investigation and the list is growing.

It may be speculation to say that the majority of pilots don't agree with you. But it's highly informed speculation.

It's the same as your argument that the plane could not have held together. It's based on an educated guess. Or have you flown every plane of the same type at that speed to see if it breaks up? No. It's based on what you consider to be an educated guess. Speculation.

It appears you are not familiar with the concept of an Expert Witness. Let me help you with that...
As for my personal opinion? What does it matter when there is a growing list of verified expert witnesses?

It appears that you're not familiar with basic logic. It is your contention that experts would tend to consider the flight in question impossible.

(Note: as above, this is not a straw man. Because if it not your contention that most experts consider the flights "impossible" then your thread, and your whole premise, is nonsense. It's a perfectly valid conclusion drawn from what you've written).

So I am asking the obvious question, which is why the aviation community in general has not signed up for P4T or some equivalent? Why there seems to be resounding silence and a mere handful of people agreeing with you.

And just as an aside, I know you read and consider canonical these sites that purport to tell you how to argue on the internet. Like most Truthers you're easily swayed by seemingly authoritative things that appeal to your emotional prejudices. But please, try to actually read and understand what is written, and discuss it logically instead of deciding it fits one of your little categories and then linking to wikipedia.

Originally posted by TiffanyInLA
reply to post by GoodOlDave

 

Now you may want to actually read the thread as we are talking about the WTC attack, not the Pentagon.

Sorry to burst your bubble Ms. LOL but it only makes your claims even more absurd. I did read the threads, and I'm quoting your own words when you said:


"All evidence thus far points to the fact that the aircraft as reported could not achieve the speeds reported as well as not able to be controlled by a "hijacker" who had less experience than one who couldn't hit a runway at 65 knots in a 172.

Let us know when you have some evidence for your claim instead of assumption, speculation or "because the govt told me so...". You and your kind have been failing for more than 60 pages."

The claim that I'm only believing a passenger jet hit the towers becuase "the gov't told me so" is presposterous on so many levels. It's the 500 videos taken from every angle and distance of the second plane striking the south tower plus the myriad eyewitness I encounter who was actually there that convinced me that a plane was deliberately crashed into the towers, not what the gov't tells me.

All in all, you're NOT disproving my point that you're grasping at straws in desperation.

Originally posted by TiffanyInLA


You lost long ago.

Yeah. Around the time that Rob Balsamo got voted onto the senate. I think what really clinched his political career was his strong showing in the Cheney trial. His evidence really contributed to the conviction, I think.

You say you have evidence that concludes that the planes were modified or not real.

Ugh, another strawman.

How is this a strawman? This is what your evidence says!

The flight was impossible, you've apparently proved. Which means that... surely even you can see that this is what your evidence, if correct, shows?

Give me one other conclusion that could be drawn from your evidence.

reply to post by GoodOlDave


The problem is that Tiffany does think a passenger jet hit the towers. She just also think she has evidence which renders this scenario impossible.

She is, in short, very confused.

Check this out. I was doing a little google research and discovered that the maximum cruising speed for the Boeing 767 is 914 km/h which (according to google's calculator) is 567.93327 mi/h.

It's under the performance section on the left:
www.airliners.net...

And here's a fun little pdf all about the speed of the aircraft on 9/11:
web.mit.edu...


In light of this, I would say that it was entirely possible.

Originally posted by TiffanyInLA
Are you saying this statement is inaccurate?

Originally posted by TiffanyInLA
"46% of the worlds population agrees with you that "Al Qaeda" performed the attacks."

Have you figured out that we are arguing the WTC attack based on the above listed evidence yet? And not the Pentagon?

Have YOU figured out this post was in response to your deliberate misinterpretation of this poll? I'm seeing the results of the poll you're referring to right in front of me and I can see right away it doesn't even remotely saying what you're claiming it says, so arguing over which building you were referring to some other post is a pretty paltry excuse on your part.

Your own evidence shows you conspiracy people are a minority of a minority. Deal with it.

How can you declare Tricky "spanked" me when you don't even know what is being argued?

All right, fair enough. Does this mean you do acknowledge that flight 77 genuinely struck the Pentagon and flights UA175 and AA11 genuinely struck the towers? If so then I fully retract my post, but if not, then at the end of the day, my post is still valid that you're resorting to absurd research methodology out of desperation to avoid having to admit you're wrong.

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
Ironic, coming from someone who uses the terms "improbable" and "impossible" interchangeably.

Another one of your strawmans.

I wasn't using them "interchangeably". I even sourced it for you. Click them and see the source and the reasons for the differences.

Are you claiming "impossible" and "suspicious" are "interchangeable"? It appears so, considering you think my words were interchangeable. You are wrong as usual.

You either acknowledge that most pilots don't agree with you, or you think that they do. It's not difficult.

It is "difficult" to come to a conclusion when they haven't been polled. You seem to disagree.

And if you don't think that most pilots think it impossible, that must mean that you think most pilots consider it possible.

Click

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
reply to post by GoodOlDave

 

The problem is that Tiffany does think a passenger jet hit the towers. She just also think she has evidence which renders this scenario impossible.

She is, in short, very confused.

Wow, they're all coming out of the woodwork again. For a tpoic that is "ridiculous" and "unpopular" and "No one cares".

Irony.

No Tricky, I'm not confused, it is you who are confused.

Again, read the evidence list.

Let us know when you get some.