Can I convince PF's resident no-planers that AAL77 hit the Pentagon - #3

Discussion in '9/11' started by cjnewson88, May 27, 2016.

  1. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,163
    Likes Received:
    1,118
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Is that a serious request?

    This forum is a perfect example of the lengths posters go to to defend the OCT. It doesn't matter what I post, they will do whatever they can, no matter how silly and/or contradictory (e.g. see post #222 in this thread), to try to argue against everything single thing I post that doesn't jive with the OCT and/or that exposes the official storytellers as complete frauds.

    So you're asking me to stop posting about the NTSB investigation that wasn't a legitimate investigation? Sorry I already did that and if I hadn't I would still post my opinion on it.
     
  2. SamSkwamch

    SamSkwamch Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2016
    Messages:
    2,247
    Likes Received:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I am serious and who cares what "lengths posters go to to defend the OCT?" These posters are overcome by emotion, they are fragile, and become overwhelmed by the lowest level propaganda imaginable. In short, they are incapable of thinking for themselves and this is by design.

    I love your heart. The time you put into to explaining this stuff is amazing. Keep up the good work, but leave the "no plane" crap alone. It is totally unnecessary, even if true.

    Be well.
     
  3. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,163
    Likes Received:
    1,118
    Trophy Points:
    113
    A couple of things. First, I'm not saying there was no plane. My contention is with the investigation (actually ALL of them), not whether or not there was a plane. And because there was no parts match, there's no way to physically identify the parts as belonging to AA77 (in this case), which is the party line. Second, the airplane hitting the Pentagon issue is not only controversial, it's also highly dubious. There's no way to me that it's not a subject up for discussion and it's far from "crap", it is reality. If I were to leave anything alone, I would not be true to myself and I would in effect be censoring myself. Why on earth should I do that? Do you believe there's good reason for anyone to remain silent on any 9/11 issue/concern?
     
  4. SamSkwamch

    SamSkwamch Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2016
    Messages:
    2,247
    Likes Received:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yes, and I think I was clear, but 1) because we have physical proof in the extreme temperatures, the sudden onset, symmetry and speed of the collapses, let alone, the plethora of individuals who heard explosions. The NIST report violates at least 2 well known laws of physics. It violates both laws of motion as well as the 2nd law of thermodynamics. And 2) as I said with respect to the Pentagon, they could release a video tomorrow of a plane hitting the pentagon and then extrapolate on that and pretend how the "truthers" were wrong about everything and really are tinfoil hat, bigfoot believing, internet trolls with no life, etc.

    Be you though, man, and be well.
     
  5. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    86,483
    Likes Received:
    19,614
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You mean you have opinions. You really have no facts to prove your assertions.
     
  6. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,163
    Likes Received:
    1,118
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Based on your posts, I'm sure you mean well but I personally don't see that as good reason. They already ridicule those who haven't bought the official story and demand real answers. You see all the labels ("truther", "conspiracy theorist", "tin foil hat", etc.) that are liberally applied to those who know about your #1 above and voice them. One poster here often claims that the idea that the 3 buildings were CD'd is "impossible" and "retarded". They will find any excuse to ridicule and insult, it's all they really have at the end of day.

    Despite all their pretentious objections, there is nothing illogical about questioning why a standard protocol used in every single airplane crash investigation was not conducted with any of the claimed 9/11 crashes. In this case, a person from the NTSB is seen and heard on video explaining that the serial number on a recovered airplane part at the Pentagon could be used to confirm the aircraft. It doesn't get any more obvious than that. Now perhaps he's a "truther" or a tin foil hat wearing nutcase?

    Thanks you too. I am what I am and I'm way too old to change my cantankerous ways. Ignore the name calling and labeling BS, it is completely irrelevant.
     
  7. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    86,483
    Likes Received:
    19,614
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Still haven't figured out that everyone but a few of you know which airplanes crashed where. No one is going to spend money to prove what is already known for a few internet warriors.
     
  8. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,163
    Likes Received:
    1,118
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You just can't help but repeat this nonsense ad nauseum, can you? I think the NTSB guy in the video knows what he's talking about and I know you don't. But thanks anyway for providing a perfect example of a pretentious objection.
     
  9. SamSkwamch

    SamSkwamch Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2016
    Messages:
    2,247
    Likes Received:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I already know, regardless of what proof is posted for you, you will not accept it if it differs from your current belief. That said, and real quick here are just some of the molten steel quotes from those who were there!

    “In the first few weeks, sometimes when a worker would pull a steel beam from the wreckage, the end of the beam would be dripping molten steel.”

    --Government Computer News website quotes Greg Fuchek

    The fires burned, up to 2,000 degrees, underground for quite a while before they actually got down to those areas and they cooled off.

    ”I talked to many contractors and they said they actually saw molten metal trapped, beams had just totally had been melted because of the heat. So this was the kind of heat that was going on when those airplanes hit the upper floors. It was just demolishing heat.”

    --Ground Zero chaplain Herb Trimpe

    “Fires are still actively burning and the smoke is very intense. In some pockets now being uncovered, they are finding molten steel.”

    --Johns Hopkins Public Health Magazine quotes Alison Geyh, Ph.D.

    “Feeling the heat, seeing the molten steel, the layers upon layers of ash, like lava, it reminded me of Mt. St. Helen’s and the thousands who fled that disaster.”

    --National Environmental Health Association quotes Ron Burger, a public health advisor at the National Center for Environmental Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

    “As of 21 days after the attack, the fires were still burning and molten steel was still running.”

    --The Newsletter of the Structural Engineers Association of Utah describing a speaking appearance by Leslie Robertson (structural engineer responsible for the design of the World Trade Center)

    “Smoke constantly poured from the peaks. One fireman told us that there was still molten steel at the heart of the towers' remains.”

    -- New York Air National Guard's 109th Air Wing


    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    A JET FUEL FIRE, REGARDLESS OF HOW MANY JILLIONS OF GALLONS OF JET FUEL THAT IS THROWN ON, AND HOW MANY DESKS, CARPETS, COMPUTERS AND CEMENT DUST DOES NOT DO THAT AND NEVER WILL!
     
  10. Blues63

    Blues63 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2014
    Messages:
    1,110
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Perhaps you can demonstrate to me that molten steel proves a controlled demolition? No truther can demonstrate this assumption, and until one can, the meme is stupid.

    So far, all any truther can do is post memes and hate on the NIST without ever reading the report, and that's just junk in the real world. Oh, and while you're at it, perhaps you can provide physical evidence for a controlled demolition as no truther here has been able to provide anything that isn't dumb or dishonest.
     
  11. SamSkwamch

    SamSkwamch Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2016
    Messages:
    2,247
    Likes Received:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It doesn't, your reading comprehension sucks. It simply proves that the fires from the known materials could not have generated that much heat.
     
  12. cjnewson88

    cjnewson88 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2013
    Messages:
    1,110
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Stay on topic. This is a thread for the Pentagon attack. I'll ask an admin to delete anything not on topic.
     
  13. SamSkwamch

    SamSkwamch Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2016
    Messages:
    2,247
    Likes Received:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Please accept my sincerest apologies.
     
  14. Eleuthera

    Eleuthera Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    6,595
    Likes Received:
    2,327
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Astounding ignorance. :thumbsdown:
     
  15. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,163
    Likes Received:
    1,118
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The thing is he posted a quote from NTSB that contradicted his claim about the serial numbers and I posted the NTSB manual that details the protocol he requested. Note he's been silent since.
     
  16. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    86,483
    Likes Received:
    19,614
    Trophy Points:
    113
    For 'accident' investigations. I guess some of you work hard at ignoring the obvious.
     
  17. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,163
    Likes Received:
    1,118
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There is no NTSB manual for non-accident investigations. it's a one manual fits all airplane crash investigations, so unless you can provide a link to any NTSB manual for non-accidental airplane crashes, your claim is nonsense. Furthermore, the NTSB claimed the recovered part contained a serial number that would be used to confirm the aircraft, he never said anything about that since it wasn't an accident, the serial number would not be used to confirm the aircraft. You should stick to what you know, if anything, about airplane crash investigations. I suspect it's very little since you invent unsupported claims from thin air.
     
  18. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    86,483
    Likes Received:
    19,614
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well duh!
     
  19. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,163
    Likes Received:
    1,118
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well yeah, that's what I suspected.
     
  20. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    86,483
    Likes Received:
    19,614
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yep, you discovered the obvious. No need for an accident investigation for a non-accident. You are coming along.
     
  21. Blues63

    Blues63 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2014
    Messages:
    1,110
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yes, one has to invest in blinkers and cotton wool to come up with some of this truther garbage. He can't disprove the fact that the planes existed, therefore he has to attack the reports. However, this is just a lazy reversal of the burden of proof, and he refuses to accept the facts regarding PENTTBOM (only the largest criminal investigation in US history).

    Oh well...that's the truther way: A truther cannot allow the facts to interfere with the dogma. :oldman:
     
  22. cjnewson88

    cjnewson88 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2013
    Messages:
    1,110
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Bob, please understand I work 65 hours a week and do not have time on a regular basis to dig through your posts and respond.

    Back to the topic, I didn't have time to dig through this thread looking for your link, but I did google and find this:

    http://www.ntsb.gov/about/Documents/MajorInvestigationsManualApp.pdf

    Which contains Appendix J under the same title as which you have been quoting, and so I believe it's the same?

    Appendix J relates specifically to the examination of materials/parts which may have failed and contributed to the accident being investigated. It says so in the very first line. They use the SN to trace any parts back to identify the background of that component, where/when it was manufactured, discoverer why the material/part failed and identify if any other parts produced may also share the same vulnerability.

    AAL77 was not bought down by any materials or parts failures, it was crashed deliberately. Therefore Appendix J does not apply.
     
  23. cjnewson88

    cjnewson88 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2013
    Messages:
    1,110
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Understand something;

    I am not saying that tracing of the serial numbers was or was not done.

    I have never seen any reports stated the NTSB did so. The only thing I have seen is the video I linked with the NTSB guy talking about it. Whether they actually did or did not, I do not know.

    What I am saying is that there is not requirement for the NTSB to always trace SN in every air accident investigation.

    In regards to the Pentagon attack, there is no reason why the NTSB would have needed to. There was no mystery around which aircraft crashed there, and material/parts failures did not contribute to AAL77's crash.
     
  24. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,163
    Likes Received:
    1,118
    Trophy Points:
    113
    My apologies for believing you failed to respond for a different reason. In any case, the above is strictly your interpretation but there's nothing in the manual that says anything about what applies and what doesn't for any section of the manual. In a video taken at the Pentagon, an NTSB guy clearly says that the serial number on a part he found can be used to confirm the aircraft. He doesn't say anything about not needing it because he knows what happened. Others in a position to know claim that they never heard of an airplane crash investigation that didn't include a forensic analysis of the recovered parts. That happened for all 4 alleged airplane crashes. IMO, there is absolutely no reason not to conduct such a simple part of the investigation, especially for the recovered FDR(s) and there are obvious reasons why this was not done. While you're absolutely right that they use the Appendix J protocol to to try to determine the cause of a crash, they also use it to CONFIRM that the part belongs to the aircraft that crashed as confirmed by the NTSB at the Pentagon.
     
  25. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    86,483
    Likes Received:
    19,614
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Like you said, that is just your opinion.
     

Share This Page