A statement.

Welcome!

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Join our community!

Pages:
1
2

A statement.; Sigh.
Topic Started: Oct 16 2008, 05:14 PM (2,710 Views)
dylan avery	Oct 16 2008, 05:14 PM Post #1
Posts: 108 Group: Admins Member #2 Joined: 12/21/07	I'm in Indiana with Korey working on a project and i have no internet access so i'm making this post from my phone. I'll make this short and simple. I was in la to go to a concert with jack blood. He asked if i wanted to go to venice and hang with warren. I said sure. I haven't seen any of these videos but i'm assuming it's something with warren yelling at passerbys. I thought it was entertaining but that's about it. Warren is a decent guy and was very hospitable towards jack and myself and i did not choose to get into an argument about theories with him. So i will now state for the record, as if this actually needs to be clarified, that i do not and will not ever support tv fakery or no wtc planes theories. Thanks for listening.
Posts: 108 Group: Admins Member #2 Joined: 12/21/07


BoneZ	Oct 16 2008, 06:22 PM Post #2
Posts: 717 Group: Members Member #269 Joined: 02/03/08	Glad to know Dylan. Where in Indiana are you? That's where I live.
Posts: 717 Group: Members Member #269 Joined: 02/03/08


mynameis	Oct 16 2008, 06:34 PM Post #3
Internet Jujitsu Posts: 1,567 Group: Members Member #50 Joined: 01/15/08	Someone needs to tell Jack Blood to post a message on deadline live forums...I suspected that the "insert cult name here" feel that they can get away with this because GCN pulled his show and will make up anything. I'd also like to say that somehow they were eavesdropping on you guys, unknown to both of you. Edited by mynameis, Oct 16 2008, 06:41 PM.



BoneZ	Oct 16 2008, 06:46 PM Post #4
Posts: 717 Group: Members Member #269 Joined: 02/03/08	Not only is Jeff posting the vids on YouTube, but so is someone else. I made it a point to post in both the vids that I found that Dylan made this statement and what was portrayed in the vids was not true. In the second vid, Jeff called Fetzer and told him the same thing he talked about with Warren. And Fetzer found that "fascinating".
Posts: 717 Group: Members Member #269 Joined: 02/03/08


Lin Kuei	Oct 17 2008, 07:17 AM Post #5
Posts: 1,293 Group: Admins Member #5 Joined: 12/22/07	this campaign by certain individuals has been disgraceful.
Posts: 1,293 Group: Admins Member #5 Joined: 12/22/07


Flippy	Oct 17 2008, 01:30 PM Post #6
Posts: 575 Group: Members Member #8 Joined: 01/12/08	pretty fucked up that you even had to write this
Posts: 575 Group: Members Member #8 Joined: 01/12/08


Gideon524	Oct 17 2008, 01:34 PM Post #7
Oh, you didn't know? Posts: 514 Group: Admins Member #4 Joined: 12/21/07	Those no-planers/fakery people seem to be starving for attention. I wonder why they're not getting it. Do they get ANYTHING besides annoying?



mynameis	Oct 17 2008, 02:33 PM Post #8
Internet Jujitsu Posts: 1,567 Group: Members Member #50 Joined: 01/15/08	Yes sociopathic and combative.



scott75	Oct 20 2008, 06:23 PM Post #9
Posts: 152 Group: Members Member #827 Joined: 09/05/08	mynameis Oct 17 2008, 02:33 PM Yes sociopathic and combative. Could they be misinformation agents? I've thought about the possibility at any rate (and I don't limit it only to no planers; I think other poor evidence theories may also have misinformation agents, with the mother of them all being the official 9/11 storyline).
Posts: 152 Group: Members Member #827 Joined: 09/05/08


Phoenix Knight	Oct 20 2008, 11:02 PM Post #10
Posts: 10 Group: Members Member #893 Joined: 10/16/08	It's hard to trust anyone calling themselves a "truther" more than ever.
Posts: 10 Group: Members Member #893 Joined: 10/16/08


TheBeatProphet	Jan 14 2009, 01:37 PM Post #11
Posts: 6 Group: Members Member #302 Joined: 02/11/08	Dylan, So that means no matter what you will never believe in no planes hitting the world trade centre towers. That kind of means that even if the evidence becomes strong enough to make that a fact you will be sat on your own somewhere in a dark room clinging to your plane story. O'dear Beat
Posts: 6 Group: Members Member #302 Joined: 02/11/08


JFK	Jan 14 2009, 02:37 PM Post #12
Posts: 4,150 Group: Admins Member #108 Joined: 01/17/08	TheBeatProphet Jan 14 2009, 01:37 PM Dylan, So that means no matter what you will never believe in no planes hitting the world trade centre towers. That kind of means that even if the evidence becomes strong enough to make that a fact you will be sat on your own somewhere in a dark room clinging to your plane story. O'dear Beat It won't. Consider this your first warning and I suggest you read the rules.
Posts: 4,150 Group: Admins Member #108 Joined: 01/17/08


BoneZ	Jan 14 2009, 04:28 PM Post #13
Posts: 717 Group: Members Member #269 Joined: 02/03/08	TheBeatProphet Jan 14 2009, 01:37 PM That kind of means that even if the evidence becomes strong enough to make that a fact you will be sat on your own somewhere in a dark room clinging to your plane story. The evidence will never become strong enough because there is no evidence. Never has been, never will be. Why do you think no-plane topics are banned from most every major 9/11 research organization in the truth movement? Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice don't support it, Architects & Engineers don't support it, Firefighters for 9/11 Truth don't support it, 9/11 Blogger doesn't support it, Loose Change doesn't support it. Looks like the no-planers are, and will continue to be, the ones in a dark room clinging to their no-plane fantasies. Buh bye.... Edited by BoneZ, Jan 14 2009, 04:29 PM.
Posts: 717 Group: Members Member #269 Joined: 02/03/08


TheBeatProphet	Jan 14 2009, 04:58 PM Post #14
Posts: 6 Group: Members Member #302 Joined: 02/11/08	And so the censorship of the truth movement continues. Have any of you people actually looked into the real evide3nce of no plane theory. Not the wacko garbage being pushed by Simon Shack, Nico Haupt, Webfairy, Killtown ect but the true factual scientific research a small section of the no plane community is doing. If this post constitutes a ban then that would tarnish the true nature of what we are working toward. Finding out who did it and how. Give me some breathing room here. Let me have my say with you people in a polite and constructive way. I wont post everywhere and spam like I know others have done in the past. No need for hostilities Beat
Posts: 6 Group: Members Member #302 Joined: 02/11/08


noeffects	Jan 14 2009, 05:16 PM Post #15
Posts: 798 Group: Members Member #178 Joined: 01/22/08	i concur, at least in the skeptics section. you sound pleasant. btw, was NPT theory ever discussed on LC forum without banishments?
Posts: 798 Group: Members Member #178 Joined: 01/22/08


painter	Jan 14 2009, 05:17 PM Post #16
Posts: 35 Group: Members Member #970 Joined: 12/17/08	TheBeatProphet Jan 14 2009, 04:58 PM And so the censorship of the truth movement continues. Have any of you people actually looked into the real evide3nce of no plane theory. Not the wacko garbage being pushed by Simon Shack, Nico Haupt, Webfairy, Killtown ect but the true factual scientific research a small section of the no plane community is doing. If this post constitutes a ban then that would tarnish the true nature of what we are working toward. Finding out who did it and how. Give me some breathing room here. Let me have my say with you people in a polite and constructive way. I wont post everywhere and spam like I know others have done in the past. No need for hostilities Beat If you have valid evidence and research to present I recommend you join the pilots for 9/11 truth forum: http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/ I'm an admin there and have been almost from its beginnings. We do allow discussion of NPT in the "Alternative Theories" sub-forum of our "Research" forum. So long as your thread is posted in THAT forum it will be respected. Be aware, however, that those of us in that forum have looked at and discussed this hypothesis for two years and, so far, have not been convinced by the evidence presented. Clearly, there is justification for some questioning -- but justification for questioning and factual evidence that is persuasive are not the same thing.
Posts: 35 Group: Members Member #970 Joined: 12/17/08


TheBeatProphet	Jan 14 2009, 05:25 PM Post #17
Posts: 6 Group: Members Member #302 Joined: 02/11/08	I'm not sure. I have heard rumors that if you mention no plane here you will be banned. I was hoping for a different attitude to be taken toward myself. I have always taken a non biased stance on the events surrounding september 11 and have found my way to be perched in the no plane pigeon hole. I hope this wont hamper my ability to post on this forum. I have had many arguments with the large majority of the no plane community. I find their ideas a insult to human intelligence. Wild fantasy is not my cup of tea. I look at the science. I make my judgements based on that and nothing else. I hope that ability to form my own opinion doesn't prevent me from posting here. Beat
Posts: 6 Group: Members Member #302 Joined: 02/11/08


BoneZ	Jan 14 2009, 05:49 PM Post #18
Posts: 717 Group: Members Member #269 Joined: 02/03/08	I would PM the admin here who goes by "JFK" and ask him if you would be allowed to make a post in the skeptics forum with your "true factual scientific" evidence on the no-plane theory. Yes it is banned here, but if you have "true factual scientific" evidence, he may allow it for a short time to see where it goes. It's worth a try.
Posts: 717 Group: Members Member #269 Joined: 02/03/08


Andrew	Jan 22 2009, 03:41 AM Post #19
Posts: 25 Group: Members Member #1,028 Joined: 01/21/09	scott75 Oct 20 2008, 06:23 PM Could they be misinformation agents? I've thought about the possibility at any rate (and I don't limit it only to no planers; I think other poor evidence theories may also have misinformation agents, with the mother of them all being the official 9/11 storyline). Yes I think that they could be. Some "Wag the Dog" type "video weirdness" may have gone on though. Planes (possibly Northwoods type drones) could have been used AND the video record has been corrupted by somebody, the two ideas are not mutually exclusive. Here is a list of UA175 speeds issued from official bodies that were presumably calculated using various video footage (?), from different angles, of the WTC2 strike: Massachusetts Institute of Technology - 503 mph / 436 knots / M0.653 British Royal Air Force - 575 mph / 500 knots / M0.750 Federal Aviation Administration - 586 mph / 510 knots / M0.765 National Institute of Standards and Technology - 546 mph / 475 knots / M0.714 Federal Emergency Management Agency - 590 mph / 514 knots / M0.771 http://web.mit.edu/civenv/wtc/PDFfiles/Chapter%20III%20Aircraft%20speed.pdf Eduardo Kausel, MIT – "the above data indicates that the terrorists flew towards the WTC close to the ground at nearly the full cruising speed of the planes, which is about 900 km/h (560 mph) at a normal altitude of 10km (33,000 feet). It is surprising that the inexperienced pilots that the terrorists were could still steer the planes at those speeds and hit their target head on. Also, considering that the air at low altitudes is much denser than that at normal cruising height, the pilots greatly exceeded Vne ("Velocity Never Exceed") and thereby risked disintegration of the aircraft by air friction." Planes of 911 Exceeded Their Software Limits http://www.viewzone.com/911revisited.html "No matter what the pilot wants, he cannot override this feature". Well I think that the theoretical problem was not just forward velocity in "thick air" causing air friction but also that the video witnessed high speed bank turn that applied an estimated 5 to 7 g forces on the plane and the proposed human contents. If the proposition concerning fly-by-wire software limits "No matter what the pilot wants, he cannot override this feature" is accurate, then I think that any conclusion that "it was overridden" by the proposed hijackers, must be a logical error. Remote or a specially programmed override cannot be ruled out though as in the apparent pre-event whistle blowing "Lone Gunman" idea. 503, 575, 586, 546 or 590 MPH is quite a wide spread of estimated speeds of approach for just one aircraft that could, obviously, have only really being flying at one speed during the final seconds before impact. Was UA175 apparently travelling at different speeds in different videos, because the different video timings were corrupted in some way, or are all these estimates simply very poorly calculated? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_175 "From the time, at approximately 08:58, when Shehhi completed the turn toward New York to the moment of impact, the plane went into a sustained power dive, descending more than 24,000 feet in 4 minutes 40 seconds, for an average rate of over 5,000 feet per minute.[13] New York Center air traffic controller Dave Bottiglia reported he and his colleagues "were counting down the altitudes, and they were descending, right at the end, at 10,000 feet per minute. That is absolutely unheard of for a commercial jet."" That is, apparently, 49 miles in 4.7 minutes, which means that the plane would have to be going 10.4 miles per minute, or 625 mph. It is claimed that a 767 simply cannot fly straight-ahead at over 500MPH, near sea level, in "thick air" of about 1.2kg/cubic metre, let alone in a high g turn. Boeing 767 Max. Cruise speed Mach 0.86 (493 kn, 568 mph, 913 km/h at 35,000 ft cruise altitude)
Posts: 25 Group: Members Member #1,028 Joined: 01/21/09


RUkiddin	Feb 25 2009, 01:31 AM Post #20
Posts: 6 Group: Members Member #1,056 Joined: 02/12/09	BoneZ Jan 14 2009, 04:28 PM TheBeatProphet Jan 14 2009, 01:37 PM That kind of means that even if the evidence becomes strong enough to make that a fact you will be sat on your own somewhere in a dark room clinging to your plane story. The evidence will never become strong enough because there is no evidence. Never has been, never will be. Why do you think no-plane topics are banned from most every major 9/11 research organization in the truth movement? Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice don't support it, Architects & Engineers don't support it, Firefighters for 9/11 Truth don't support it, 9/11 Blogger doesn't support it, Loose Change doesn't support it. Well, it may not be their official policy, but the Petitioner of the Month for Architects & Engineers is a no-planer who believes all the video fakery garbage. Their aerospace engineer doesn't think any airliners were used on 9/11. I recall that Dylan, in Loose Change 2, claims that no airliners crashed at Shanksville or the Pentagon, and that whatever hit the towers, it wasn't flights 11 and 175. Has that changed?
Posts: 6 Group: Members Member #1,056 Joined: 02/12/09


skunkrider	Feb 25 2009, 02:04 AM Post #21
Posts: 326 Group: Members Member #166 Joined: 01/21/08	There's a difference between "this certain plane has not been used" and "no planes were used at all". RUkiddin, do you know Operation Northwoods? If so, then you'll know that the supposed passenger plane was replaced by a remotely controlled drone. It's still a plane, but not the same one.
Posts: 326 Group: Members Member #166 Joined: 01/21/08


Lin Kuei	Feb 25 2009, 02:58 AM Post #22
Posts: 1,293 Group: Admins Member #5 Joined: 12/22/07	BoneZ Jan 14 2009, 05:49 PM I would PM the admin here who goes by "JFK" and ask him if you would be allowed to make a post in the skeptics forum with your "true factual scientific" evidence on the no-plane theory. Yes it is banned here, but if you have "true factual scientific" evidence, he may allow it for a short time to see where it goes. It's worth a try. Rules are rules. No NPT here. If people want to pursue it on other forums then so be it. Not here.
Posts: 1,293 Group: Admins Member #5 Joined: 12/22/07


ScaffoldRider	Feb 25 2009, 10:46 AM Post #23
Posts: 18 Group: Members Member #305 Joined: 02/11/08	Lin Kuei Feb 25 2009, 02:58 AM Rules are rules. No NPT here. If people want to pursue it on other forums then so be it. Not here. THANK YOU!
Posts: 18 Group: Members Member #305 Joined: 02/11/08


jstrand	Mar 22 2009, 05:08 PM Post #24
Posts: 16 Group: BANNED! Member #1,094 Joined: 03/19/09	What about the missile that hit the pentagon?
Posts: 16 Group: BANNED! Member #1,094 Joined: 03/19/09


BoneZ	Mar 22 2009, 07:01 PM Post #25
Posts: 717 Group: Members Member #269 Joined: 02/03/08	jstrand Mar 22 2009, 05:08 PM What about the missile that hit the pentagon? If you head down to the Pentagon forum, there's a few threads there for your reading pleasure.
Posts: 717 Group: Members Member #269 Joined: 02/03/08


1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)


Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · The Lounge · Next Topic »

Pages:
1
2