Official Story Shill Crushed By Truther/Researcher in Radio Debate!

Originally posted by ATH911

Originally posted by pteridine

No fly away, PostEx. CIT theory doesn't make the grade.

Only if you are right (no fly away) and their theory has only one part to it. Too bad for you it doesn't (their theory having only one part to it).

There were no witnesses to any flyaway, so that part is done. The big bang theory of everybody in DC ducking during a flyaway was hilarious. I can't imagine anyone actually buying into that.
A multi-part theory fails if one part fails. They must have had a back-up theory to spring on people when the first flopped so spectacularly. What weaseling did they do to advance a second theory? There was a lot of tapdancing by Craig for a while and I didn't bother to see what survived as his arguments were generally weak and completely unsupported. This was when he was banning people from his website for incorrect political thinking and questioning his pronouncements.

reply to post by impressme


There is nothing faith based about it. The hijackers families and respective governments have acknowledged who the hijackers were. Their governments even provided DNA samples from the families that were used to identify remains belonging to the hijackers.....

Wait....I forgot, the entire FBI and the patholgists were in on it too..........

reply to post by vipertech0596

There is nothing faith based about it.

Who are you trying to appeal to? Certainly not me. The fact is the official story of 911 “is faith base,” really I would love to live in your reality, however your views and opinions lack any substance or any credibility.

The hijackers families and respective governments have acknowledged who the hijackers were.

Again you are back in parroting a faith base fairytale.

Their governments even provided DNA samples from the families that were used to identify remains belonging to the hijackers.....

How did the government determine who the hijackers were when they were all using stolen identities?
And to whom where the FBI matching DNA to?
All you are doing is parroting the OS on faith base hearsay information from our government as if it was the Holy Grail of truth.

Wait....I forgot, the entire FBI and the patholgists were in on it too..........

That is your opinion, not mine. Being sarcastic doesn’t make you very credible does it?

Originally posted by pteridine

A multi-part theory fails if one part fails.

So if a plane didn't fly over, but flew NoC, that wouldn't prove the OS wrong?


.

Originally posted by impressme

Who are you trying to appeal to? Certainly not me. The fact is the official story of 911 “is faith base,” really I would love to live in your reality, however your views and opinions lack any substance or any credibility.

Viper is only trying to educate you with facts. You, like all truthers (yes all since it's been 10 years and you have had the facts for 5+ years) ignore the facts. You guys have been at this for a decade now and have failed. No planers are the cream of the crop though.

Really, I can't think of a more pathetic fantasy. Tricking people into believing that a plane is crashing into one of the most popular buildings in the world....and flying it OVER instead?

impressme... you think no-planers have substance? credibility? There is a reason why the Fly-Over twosome has been banned from most Truther Tree Forts.

reply to post by Six Sigma


For some reason, I keep seeing Apollo Creed in Rocky IV saying "Don't towel me Rock"

Only someone bent on remaining ignorant would look at all the evidence and proclaim that the truth is a fairy tale.

Originally posted by ATH911

Originally posted by pteridine

A multi-part theory fails if one part fails.

So if a plane didn't fly over, but flew NoC, that wouldn't prove the OS wrong?


.

edit on 15-11-2011 by ATH911 because: (no reason given)

It might cause for some re-evaluation, but you forget that there is no true OS. There is the "majority accepted conclusion" that the government backs, but that can be changed if new facts surface. Changing one minor aspect would not invalidate the whole.

The problem with suggesting that the plane flew NoC is that there are enough witnesses who saw otherwise, that it simply makes no sense. I admit that the two policemen's accounts were quite convincing, but there must be some explanation. The policemen were recalling events from 5 years before, and I noticed that their memories were being jogged frequently about very obvious things that should have been remembered. It throws into question their exact recollection of the impact.

Still, in all these reports, even those who think they saw the plane in other places, a plane still came down and hit the pentagon. That is not under debate.

reply to post by Six Sigma

Viper is only trying to educate you with facts.

What do you think I am an idiot? What facts? The fact is all he has done is parroted the OS verbatim. And giving his opinion nothing more. I am sure he is able to debate with me without you insulting my intelligent.

You, like all truthers (yes all since it's been 10 years and you have had the facts for 5+ years) ignore the facts.

So now discussing anything against the 911 government fairytales, and mainstream media a status quo of misinforming the public, and now I am unpatriotic and un-truth. So you enjoy using the term” Truthers” the way the lying media (FOX News, Bill O’Riely) has program their sleeping audience and your here to tell me to throw my logic and critical thinking out the window and accept the lies told by our government concerning 911 correct?
Your opinion and Vipers by repeating the OS lies are not the facts.

You guys have been at this for a decade now and have failed. No planers are the cream of the crop though.

Polls prove we (Truthers) are winning; it’s just a matter of time before people like you who have demonstrated on these 911 boards by insulting people Intelligent and supporting blind faith based hearsay information disappear. Who are you trying to fool?

Really, I can't think of a more pathetic fantasy. Tricking people into believing that a plane is crashing into one of the most popular buildings in the world....and flying it OVER instead?

The truth doesn’t need tricking, however people telling lies need to trick their audience and I NEVER made any claims of a fly over. So now you have accuse me of lying and trickery, this is typical coming from individuals who cannot debate the facts and are supporting a mountain lies told by leaders in Washington by, blind, faith belief.

impressme... you think no-planers have substance?

Six Sigma… there is no evidence that a plane crashed you have the word of our government blind faith.
Apparently you keep demonstrating that you are not here to discuss anything but to continue parroting the OS of proven lies and belittle your opponent, am I correct?

There is a reason why the Fly-Over twosome has been banned from most Truther Tree Forts.

You are talking to the wrong person here; I do not endorse the fly over because I am convinced there never was an airplane crash to begin with. because there is no physical evidence that can validated it belong to the said plane, nothing, zero, nada. Apparently you have me confuse with someone else.

reply to post by ATH911


If the CITGO was the size of a shopping mall, it MIGHT call things into question. But since it's a p*ssant convience store, not so much. Depending on a persons vantage point, and with the speed of the aircraft....not to mention the leading questions and memory prods, someone might be able to say it was NoC and still be wrong. And in the end, does not change the fact that flight 77 hit the Pentagon.

reply to post by vipertech0596

For some reason, I keep seeing Apollo Creed in Rocky IV saying "Don't towel me Rock"

Only someone bent on remaining ignorant would look at all the evidence and proclaim that the truth is a fairy tale.

I find it rather amusing that there are still people on ATS who assume “opinions” and proven lies from the 911 OS are the facts even without any sources typical blind faith. There are a few people in our government who love you guys they are delighted when they see people not us logic or critical thinking skills because these few men hate it. Richard Cheney was a prime example, including George Bush when he announced publicly that we all should not listen to conspiracy theories concerning 911.
The fact is the OS of 911 is a conspiracy theory.

Originally posted by Varemia

It might cause for some re-evaluation, but you forget that there is no true OS. There is the "majority accepted conclusion" that the government backs, but that can be changed if new facts surface. Changing one minor aspect would not invalidate the whole.

But there are lamp posts that were knocked over. If people saw the plane in a different place, those are hard to explain, right?

reply to post by ATH911


What is the second theory? CIT struck out with the flyover theory.

reply to post by impressme


Umm, you have not proven anything. If anyone is taking things on faith, its those who believe the CIT.....and their lunatic theories.

Tower personnel at RR National witnessed Flight 77....FACT. ATC personnel tracked Flight 77 on radar...FACT. Numerous persons witnessed an American Airlines 757 hit the Pentagon...FACT. Numerous pieces of a 757 were recovered from the crash site at the Pentagon...FACT. Some of those items were cataloged and matched against the maintenance records for the airliner known as Flight 77...FACT. That airframe has not been seen intact since Sept 11, 2001....FACT. Remains of people witnessed to have boarded Flight 77 were recovered from the Pentagon...FACT. From airline records and communications from Flight 77, we know who the hijackers were...FACT. Those same hijackers have not been seen since Sept 11, 2001....FACT. The FBI as of November 2001, has absolutely NO doubt as to the identity of said hijackers...FACT. Their respective governments have agreed on their identities...FACT. Their families have agreed on their identities..FACT. I could go on and on.....

However, for YOUR theory to be right...

The tower personnel are lying
The ATC personnel are lying
The witnesses at the Pentagon are lying
The recovery personnel at the Pentagon (local, state and federal) are lying
The federal investigators are lying
The airline/insurance personnel who cataloged the wreckage and stored it are lying
The airline personnel who checked the hijackers and passengers aboard Flight 77 are lying
The FBI is lying
The AFIP is lying
The governments of Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Egypt are lying
The families of the hijackers are lying.



Keep on believing the CIT though, there Apollo.....

reply to post by ProudBird


ProudBird,

When you have a moment can you explain this line that you wrote?

"The wings were certainly strong enough, at that velocity, due to the kinetic energy of momentum."

Are you saying that wings become stronger or weaker relative to velocity?

I might have missed that during my university physics classes.

While you at it provide a formula for this concept, "due to the kinetic energy of momentum."

Thanks in advance.

Originally posted by magicrat

Originally posted by Varemia

It might cause for some re-evaluation, but you forget that there is no true OS. There is the "majority accepted conclusion" that the government backs, but that can be changed if new facts surface. Changing one minor aspect would not invalidate the whole.

But there are lamp posts that were knocked over. If people saw the plane in a different place, those are hard to explain, right?

I admit that did come up in my line of reasoning, and after trying to draw my own flight paths based on the witness testimonies, the only way I can make the story start to fit as north of citgo is if I have the plane take a sharp right turn, then left, or if I have the plane come in from a different angle.

Overall, my line hit a snag when witnesses were saying that the plane came in straight, or veered slightly to the left, etc.

The official story's flight path matches the most witnesses and has physical evidence to back it up, so that's what I consider most likely at the moment. Not sure how to explain the officers, unless they somehow just had their directions messed up.

reply to post by BRAVO949

Are you saying that wings become stronger or weaker relative to velocity?

They are the same structure of course, with the same mass..... regardless of velocity. The point made is a fundamental of physics, especially for an object in motion. It has momentum, and kinetic energy as a result of motion. The mass is in motion, and can produce a force on impact, depending on the velocity.

F = m*a

The same way a small .45 caliber bullet will pierce through a certain thickness of a specific material, depending on its velocity. If you merely throw it by hand, then of course the momentum of the bullet is much lower than if fired from a gun.

Water, when ejected at sufficient velocity (due to very high pressures, and a concentrated stream) can cut metal. This is basic physics.

Another aspect of an airliner's wing that many fail to consider is the fuel inside. Especially, as was the case with all the jets on 9/11, when the wing tanks are completely full. Liquids are incompressible. That's why they work in hydraulic systems.

The fuel, in a container, will for a split second behave, in terms of its momentum from the inherent mass and velocity, behave with all th force as a solid.....until its container ruptures, then fluid dynamics come into play. But, the initial impact has all the kinetic energy of the total mass of the wing structure itself, + the fuel contained within.

Plus.....there is the added over-all momentum from the mass of the entire airplane, aft of the point of initial contact (the forward fuselage) that is acting, for those micro-seconds by micro-seconds, as if it were all one unit. Break-up occurs, and the energy of the velocity times mass is dissipated....

Once the mass hits an obstruction of some kind, then the chaos begins, and each material that interacts with the others will behave according to their properties, and states of energy.

Originally posted by Varemia

Overall, my line hit a snag when witnesses were saying that the plane came in straight, or veered slightly to the left, etc.

What the whitenesses describe and the FDR shows is, the plane only banked. Don't confuse bank with a turn they are not always the same. I can do a 360 degree bank and maintain a constant heading no problem. To preform a turn you bank the plane and increase the angle of attack to carve the turn. Flt 77 held a heading and banked left and right (due to the pilot over controlling) without turning.

The tree the starboard engine trimmed to me is one of most interesting clues in the flight path. No Truther has ever tried to explained how they faked that. Did they sneak in a top secrete team of undercover government topiary agents to trim it ?



And then there's the mark left on the pole by the starboard tip. Penny Elgas had a piece of debris from the crash site, she later donated to the Smithsonian, which coincidentally turned out to be a piece of the starboard wing tip. Her car was just down range of that pole

reply to post by vipertech0596

Umm, you have not proven anything. If anyone is taking things on faith, its those who believe the CIT.....and their lunatic theories.

I certainly have had you bothered to read any of my sources and you just demonstrated that you have not.
And no it’s people who believe in fairytales like (911 OS)

Tower personnel at RR National witnessed Flight 77....FACT. ATC personnel tracked Flight 77 on radar...FACT. Numerous persons witnessed an American Airlines 757 hit the Pentagon...FACT. Numerous pieces of a 757 were recovered from the crash site at the Pentagon...FACT.

Not a proven fact. Again hearsay information on blind faith doesn’t make it a fact.

Some of those items were cataloged and matched against the maintenance records for the airliner known as Flight 77...FACT.

Not a fact, if it was you would have delightfully given us a credible source to back you “opinion.”

That airframe has not been seen intact since Sept 11, 2001....FACT.

Perhaps so, probably because this boneyard debris “serial numbers” would not match the alleged plane.
Only one can speculate why the government has to continued in hiding evidence even after 10 years and believe me when I say this, the government is not storing airplane debris because they are still investigating 911, because they admitted they never investigated these four plane crashes to begin with.
Your information is only as good as your sources, something that you neglect to provide the ATS readers. Your opinions your assumptions are not the facts.

Remains of people witnessed to have boarded Flight 77 were recovered from the Pentagon...FACT.

Not a fact, first responders saw no airplane debris or bodies right after the Pentagon exploded all the earlier photos and videos taken before the Pentagon collapsed proves this. I believe you already know this but completely ignore these facts because they do not fit the OS.

From airline records and communications from Flight 77, we know who the hijackers were...FACT.

Not a fact just your “opinion” it was never proven who the real hijackers were, if this statement was true you would gladly given us a credible sources.

Those same hijackers have not been seen since Sept 11, 2001....FACT.

Not a fact, that’s why seven out of the nineteen hijackers are still alive and walking around and have filed law suits against our government because their identities were stolen all these lawsuits were quietly settled out of court and now the question is the government never were able to prove who these hijackers were and again who were the FBI matching DNA to? You cannot have it both ways.

The FBI as of November 2001, has absolutely NO doubt as to the identity of said hijackers...FACT.

This is statment is completely untrue and you know this. We have covered this topic way too many times, now you are Trolling.

Their respective governments have agreed on their identities...FACT.

What respective governments? It has never been proven to what Country they allegedly came from. Another untrue statement, do you make up this garbage as you type?

Their families have agreed on their identities..FACT. I could go on and on.....

Not facts, your opinion only, please go on and on… I am being quite entertained by your assumptions.

However, for YOUR theory to be right...

The tower personnel are lying
The ATC personnel are lying
The witnesses at the Pentagon are lying
The recovery personnel at the Pentagon (local, state and federal) are lying
The federal investigators are lying
The airline/insurance personnel who cataloged the wreckage and stored it are lying
The airline personnel who checked the hijackers and passengers aboard Flight 77 are lying
The FBI is lying
The AFIP is lying
The governments of Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Egypt are lying
The families of the hijackers are lying.

I love the broad brush that you paint everything with. Not only are your questions getting ridiculous your assumptions (answers) have no credibility.
For us to believe in your stories, one has to throw away logic and critical thinking and support hearsay information on blind faith. As if people don’t have any motives to lie and everyone is telling the gospel truth.
Sorry friend, find some other sucker to spoon feed this drivel to, I am not buying it.

Keep on believing the CIT though, there Apollo.....

AS I told someone else in this thread who has demonstrated that he cannot comprehend what I have said, I do *NOT support CIT fly over …* and you just demonstrated the very same thing. Pretty poor comprehension if you ask me.

reply to post by Varemia
Gotta give you credit for thinking things through on your own and acknowledging the uncertainty in what you see. Personally, I find the CIT interviews really credible, especially the officers, and the analysis backs them up more than it debunks them, so I'm biased in that direction as I look at other things.

That said, as much as I love waypastvne's idea of a "top secret team of undercover government topiary agents," I have no idea how to come up with a logical explanation for the damage to that tree in the context of the NOC flight path. I'll have to look into that some more.