I am both a pilot and an aircraft mechanic so I can understand your lack of knowledge but your lack of knowledge is not a good place to start on this issue.
so as a mechanic and a pilot, you absolutely deny the factor of the increase in power required to propel any given physical object through air given an increase in speed. is that what you want?
So as an alleged pilot and aircraft mechanic (your claim), what is your opinion of the the fact that no forensic airplane crash investigation was ever conducted for any of the 4 airplane crashes? Part of such an investigation would include an inventory of all parts recovered and a thorough identification of these recovered parts, including especially the recovered flight recorders. "In all my years of direct and indirect participation, I never witnessed nor even heard of an aircraft loss, where the wreckage was accessible, that prevented investigators from finding enough hard evidence to positively identify the make, model, and specific registration number of the aircraft — and in most cases the precise cause of the accident." "parts are individually controlled by a distinctive serial number and tracked by a records section of the maintenance operation and by another section called plans and scheduling" - George Nelson, Colonel, USAF (ret.) http://physics911.net/georgenelson/ How can anyone know for a fact that any of these recovered parts actually belong to the claimed airplanes without such an investigation?
LOL, it was readily apparent what happened through ATC and which aircraft were involved. You don't need to prove the readily obvious.
That's your opinion??? Is that a joke? This is a thread called "Basic logic" and what you just posted is so ridiculously illogical it's jaw dropping. You're saying analogously that when a person is murdered and the body is riddled with bullet wounds, no forensic autopsy is required because it's "readily obvious" what happened. But yet autopsies are required in every case where a person dies from unnatural causes and even in some cases where it looks like a natural cause but the cause of death can't be readily determined. For example, the guy whose body was riddled with bullet wounds could have died a couple of hours earlier from a heart attack but someone decided to make it look like a murder to frame someone. So by your logic, why ever conduct any investigation, just take a look and ASSume what looks obvious. In this case, there were allegedly 4 airplane crashes due to the worst terrorist act in modern US history and not one forensic airplane crash investigation was ever conducted. Ok thanks, you lost all credibility, you failed basic logic 101 spectacularly. I don't even buy your claimed expertise, it makes no sense based on your answer. A REAL PILOT made the right call.
Pretty bad analogy. They have the body so they already know who was killed. The forensics in this analogy would be who did it, not who it was done to. Here is your logic. Your mother is killed right in front of you and you want someone to convince you it was your mother. Your ignorance of logic is not my problem.
So now you are admitting that your OP is fraudulent? Obviously you cannot refute any of the engineering facts provided that blow holes all the way through it.
Actually the NTSB did research all 4 crashes. http://911research.wtc7.net/planes/evidence/ntsb.html The cause of the crashes was known from the outset. The planes were hijacked by terrorists so there was no need to do any forensics looking for failures of engines or airframe components. The failures all occurred on the ground before any of the planes ever took off and they can all be traced to a failure to heed the warnings by those charged with protecting this nation and We the People.
"The planes were hijacked by terrorists so there was no need to do any forensics looking for failures of engines or airframe components. " Total baloney! the characteristics of an aircraft during a crash are of interest to the aircraft engineers because it reveals valuable information about the structure and what would make it fail in certain ways, making excuses about why no analysis was done, is very lame!
No it's right on the money. Obviously, but irrelevant. A forensic autopsy is never about who did it, it's about the cause of death. If it's natural, no one did it to no one, duh. It's not my logic, it's yours. A forensic autopsy is always about the cause of death and other mitigating circumstances that may or may not be identifiable via the autopsy. That may or may not eventually lead to who may have been responsible for the death. In the case of the 4 alleged airplanes, without a forensic crash investigation, how can we know for certain: 1. These were planes. 2. What kind of planes if they were planes. 3. If the planes were in fact the ones claimed, if they were all planes that is. 4. That any or all the parts were planted or not. And since no forensic crash investigation was ever conducted on any of the 4 alleged planes, something that is ALWAYS done, how can we know the US government is not hiding something? And the answer is OBVIOUS (basic logic 101), they are. But it's also obvious you're quite willing to dismiss/ignore the possibility. And your ignorance is apparent with your posts. It certainly isn't my problem, I don't care, it just goes to show how far one can take your credibility, about a picometer perhaps, maybe less? - - - Updated - - - And ridiculous nonsense.
Sorry that does not constitute a standard forensic airplane crash investigation, nor is it a substitute for one. ASSumptions do not have any place in any forensic investigation of any kind and are NOT a substitute for a standard forensic airplane crash investigation. This is the same kind of ignorant mentality as "we know what happened so why bother to investigate"?
Just to add my bit on the forensic examination, given a body and apparent stab/gunshot wounds, one could easily assume that the cause of death was physical trauma, however, what if the victim had been doing drugs and was already dead when shot/stabbed and only by way of an autopsy was it to be found out, that is the actual cause of death. Making excuses for not doing ones job is really lame, note that in the case of the World Trade Center building collapses, the NIST made the excuse that they didn't check for explosive residue because they assumed that there would be none and so why go looking for something that isn't there? Really people, there is such a thing as criminal incompetence and we have some examples of public servants who either have refused to do their jobs, or were so totally incompetent at said job as to be completely useless.
Sure they do, calls from the crew and passengers on the planes confirmed what was going on. All the facts are there. They were planes and they knew which ones hit which buildings. You want someone to prove the obvious.
So you didn't bother to read any of the NTSB investigation documents that were linked to that site that detail their investigations into each crash like these ones? http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB196/index.htm All standard forensic crash investigation includes those reports. Furthermore only one of the flight data recorders survived so that was provided in a linked study. To allege that there wasn't any forensic crash investigations is disingenuous.
Phone calls can be faked, in the face of insufficient wreckage to actually prove that either "FLT11" , "FLT175" , "FLT77" or "FLT93" crashed at any of he alleged crash sites, there should have been a LOT more questioning of what is going on. There are still at least two jet engines missing from the WTC towers site and quite possibly more from the others, what we are left with is most deffinitly insufficient data to KNOW if any one of the allegedly hijacked airliners existed at all.
The link you provided has 8 documents listed, care to enlighten me as to where I may find a detailed analysis of the physical remains of any one of the 4 alleged hijacked airliners ?
Thats right, take it away into the land of emotional appeal, rather than logical examination of evidence. BTW: witch one of those 8 documents describes the examination of physical evidence?
You also think all the ATC personnel across multiple ATC high altitude centers are also lying and the ATC recordings are all fake? Mind you, I also used to work in the Indianapolis ATC high altitude center.
More ignorant silliness. No airplane crashes have ever failed to be investigated where there was available debris, 9/11 was the only exception that I'm aware of. I don't want anyone to prove what YOU believe may or may not be obvious to YOU, I want what is SOP with all airplane crashes, a detailed forensic investigation, period.
None of that has anything to do with what is real world about forensic examinations. And I'll admit I was wrong about one thing in a forensic autopsy that is an even better analogy. In cases where one cannot identify the body (e.g. because it's burned beyond recognition), an autopsy is performed using other means (e.g. dental forensics) to identify the body. So it's not always for the purpose of determining the cause of death.
No it's a fact, the NTSB investigation was NOT a forensic airplane crash investigation. A part of an airplane crash investigation is not the complete investigation. There was NO excuse for failing to conduct a forensic airplane crash investigation, which is critical, you're just being an apologist for a massive (and deliberate) failure. As to the FDR, it also contains a serial number that can be matched to the actual airplane, where is the report that details that such a match was found and verified? Where is a detailed report on the chain of custody with regard to the parts found? Certainly none of that exists in any of the links you provided and you know it. Any fool would think that if they had that, they would gladly show it to the world to prove there's a match.
LOL, the NTSB investigates to determine the cause. In this case the cause was obvious. That's like saying everyone saw who shot your mother then shot themselves, on tape, including you but your not sure so you want an investigation because you don't know the witnesses.
