Interesting 9/11 video

Discussion in 'Conspiracies' started by Kittamaru, Aug 8, 2014.

  1. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    I haven't watched the whole thing yet... but some of the pictures/questions raised regarding the Pentagon impact are... well, nothing short of disturbing.

    It's rather chilling... I'm generally not one for conspiracy theories... but what happens when you start seeing pretty substantial evidence to support it? What hit the building... I dunno - but it certainly doesn't look like it could have been a plane at this point 0_o
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Didn't even make it past the five minute mark. I can't stomach his misuse of the word theory.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. Arne Saknussemm trying to figure it all out Valued Senior Member

    Thank you. Now it's clear to me what the trouble with SciForum really is: a moderator who can't get past the first five minutes of a video which correctly defines the word 'theory'. You claim to have watched nearly five minutes, but what's the good if you have paid no attention?

    The word 'theory' has more than one meaning: all of them rather similar. It is not for you to say which dictionary definition is correct, or even suits you best. How can you be a moderator when you don't even know how language works or what it is for? You don't get to decide what words mean unless you want to go live by yourself in a cave in the hills somewhere. One correct definition of the word 'theory' is literally spelt out in a sub-text. If you had been listening and understanding, you would know that the term in question is not even 'theory', but 'conspiracy theory'. Moreover, the speaker concludes at 3:58,"It will be up to you to decide if this is a conspiracy theory or indeed a 'conspiracy." What else do you want?

    @Kittamaru: Thank you too! I watched the entire video, and it's a real eye-opener. As soon as 9/11 happened I 'theorized' that Rumsfeld, Cheney and the gang were high-fiving, hugging and dancing around in the Oval Office's secret bunker (in West Virginia), crowing,"Now we can do anything we want!" I imagined Dick getting on the phone to inform his military-industrial complex friends that, "We now have free reign! Break out the champagne." As soon as the Orville Redenbacher's: Classic & Gourmet Popping Corn was ready they slapped Licence to Kill i into the CD player. No need for those guys to watch the news reports. They masterminded the script months ago.

    Alas, my theory was no more than that, a theory. I could prove nothing. If ✈|| In Plane Site has taught me nothing else, I see that I too had fallen into a position that was exactly where 'they' wanted me. SInce about 9/12/2001 I have refused to look at the videos, even turning away whenever I have seen them broadcast. I thought I was so empathetic - asking why they had to keep showing THAT!

    Another thing I have always been saying is that Osama bin Laden is a creature of the CIA, and I am often dismissed as a crackpot, by other Americans, for thinking so. However, everyone outside of the U.S. says I am just stating the obvious.

    Now thanks to you and, let's not forget Moderator Trippy I appreciate the value of staring at truth unflinchingly and trying to see it for what it is without my feelings getting in the way. My, how very objective and scientific of me! Just the qualities needed in a Science Forum moderator, wouldn't you say?
    Snowshy likes this.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. Captain Kremmen All aboard, me Hearties! Valued Senior Member

  8. Arne Saknussemm trying to figure it all out Valued Senior Member

    Yes, captain. I know it's long, but why not watch the video bit by bit? One of the questions asked is - where is the airplane debris of the Pentagon 9/11 attack? Another is why is the damaged area so much narrower than a 757's wingspan? (And many related questions).

    You can watch from 7:25 onward in the video for several minutes to learn more. Because I bought into the "too painful to look at" ploy, I never deeply considered that the hole in the side of the Pentagon isn't all that big or that it is less damage than you'd expect if an airliner of that size had hit it. (I guess I don't really know the scale the Pentagon is built on, or the exact size of a 757, if it's not right in front of me). And how would I know how much damage a commercial jetliner flying into a brick building will do? Not a thing, I often dwell upon.

    And where is the plane debris?
  9. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    This is always so sad to watch the willful ignornace blossom around 911. I know of probably 10 -20 times evidence of debris has been shown on this site, yet the same crap claim comes up time and time again.

    Here is a short analysis (about 6 minutes) of the penagon {with debris!!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    ). There is tons of other evidence, you know the plane that doesn't exist anymore, the missing passengers the missing crew - stuff like that. I mean for crissake!?!

  10. Captain Kremmen All aboard, me Hearties! Valued Senior Member

    I would have expected there to be engine debris, even if the alloy body oxidised and crumbled.
    But that may have been in the lump of fused material to the left of the bits of building he showed.
    What was in that lump of stuff?

    He showed a part of the building that was not burned, and concluded from that that there was an explosion rather than a fire.
    I'd say some of it was burned, and some wasn't. Some of it is clearly burned.

    I've watched enough to be not greatly impressed.

    Added later.
    re The pictures of debris supplied. Thanks Origin.
  11. Arne Saknussemm trying to figure it all out Valued Senior Member

    Here is one link that questions where the bodies were. When I searched for Pentagon 9/11 victims, I mostly got links that questioned if the crash really happened.

    Your video link was terribly unconvincing, and it reminded me that in the Plane Site video this thread is discussing that it seems rather strange that at the Pentagon -of all places- there is but one security video as if it were a Dairy Queen in Fairfax Virginia. At about 12:50 they point out that the security camera has the wrong date and 'they don't really show that there was a 757 that hit the Pentagon'.

    The first piece of purported debris your video shows is the very same bit mentioned at 26:30 or so in the video. They say it is not part of a 757.

    Two things: One: I did not start this thread and I am reluctant to become a 9/11 conspiracy theorist. Don't ask me about the video anymore please. I wish to bow out of this discussion. Two: why don't you actually watch the video before arguing that it must be wrong? It is plain that you did not. You're just wasting people's time commenting on a video you haven't actually seen. I'm done here.
  12. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Do "they"?

    Well, then enough said.
  13. Captain Kremmen All aboard, me Hearties! Valued Senior Member

    There's no point in my watching the whole video.
    I don't know enough about the subject to be a judge of it.
    All these conspiracies sound convincing if you watch the videos.
    I would watch it, but he was starting to bore me.

    The question is: "Who do you trust to look at the evidence?"

    This site suggests that the wreckage is from a 757:

    Even if you could prove for certain the bits were from a 757, conspiracy theorists would say that it was planted.
  14. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Are you actually serious???
  15. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Give it a bloody rest! I live in the Washington DC region and I know several people who actually watched the plane hit the Pentagon.

    The city of Arlington, which includes the Pentagon and Arlington Cemetery, is the southwest corner of Washington, on the west side of the Potomac River, which was retroceded back to Virginia after the Civil War. It is very urban, very populous. There is a shopping mall and a Costco a couple of blocks from the Pentagon, and the DC Metro (the subway system) has a station right outside the building--which also has a huge parking lot! There were thousands of people in the streets and on the sidewalks when that plane hit. And unlike the WTC, it occurred almost at ground level.

    Hey, it's MY job to bitch about language errors!

    Considering that even scientists don't use the word "theory" correctly, I don't see any point in ragging on laymen about it. Its proper definition is "a hypothesis that has been proven true beyond a reasonable doubt" like evolution or plate tectonics. Yet these same guys coined the term "string theory," which is nothing more than a bunch of entertaining math backed up by a lot of arm-waving.

    Well duh? The Bush family are barons in the energy industry. That makes the Saudis their bosom buddies. Remember that horrible photo spread of Backward Baby Bush tiptoeing through the tulips holding hands with King Abdullah several months after 9/11?

    Does anybody really believe that Abdullah did not know the whereabouts of his own brother-in-law at every moment? If we had threatened to bomb Riyadh and Mecca, instead of Baghdad and Kabul, Osama's head would have been delivered to the White House service entrance in a FedEx truck within 36 hours. B.B.B. desperately had to come up with a reason to blame somebody else for 9/11, so he made up the lie about Saddam having WMDs, even though the U.N. inspectors had already determined that he did not. Their findings hadn't been released to the public yet, but you can be sure they were delivered to the White House before noon on 9/11--if Bush didn't already have them!

    Bush's desperate antics to convince us that Iraq (the only secular, pro-Western nation in the entire region) and Afghanistan (a country that even Attila the Hun could not conquer) were to blame resulted in the Middle East losing what little stability it had, and the entire world will be paying the price for that for decades. He should be in prison for treason.

    Oh wait... he's the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces! Does that mean he could be court-martialed? Does the military sentence traitors to capital punishment?

    Arne started out as a serious member, but he's spent too much time arguing with Paddoboy, Cluelusshusband, DMOE and the rest of that crowd.
  16. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Let me elaborate:

    Well, no. Everything is a conspiracy, what we have are two opposing conspiracies - a group of muslim extremeists conspiring to blow up certain buildings in the US versus the US Government conspiring to blow up buildings in the US. Both are theories, both are theories that center around a conspiracy.

    This is the way the word is commonly used, the way the word is commonly used by laypeople is not neccessarily correct. It is precisely this kind of mis-use of the word theory that leads to creationists making statements like "Well, evolution is only a theory, right?" Yeah, so is gravity, but you don't see people acting that way when deciding whether to leave their third floor apartment by the door or by the window do you?

    This is precisely the abuse I am referring to. It's not a theory that you might win a prize, it's a 'fact'. If the draw is random, every ticket has an equal opportunity to win a prize. That's not to say that it's a gauranteed outcome - if there are three million combinations of numbers available for your raffle ticket, and only one of those produces a price, then there is one outcome that leads to a prize and 2,999,999 that will not.

    What win? If you never by a ticket you never have a chance of winning. What you have here, at best, is hypothetical winnings not theoretical winnings. And that's the point, when most people say "Theoretically speaking" what they actually mean is "Hypothetically speaking".

    Swap theory for hypothesis and this statement is technically correct. Why? The initial hypothesis was: IF I buy a lottery ticket THEN I have an chance of winning, you've fulfilled the conditions of the initial hypothesis.

    Equal parts accurate and hooey. While it's true that purchasing additional tickets increases your likelyhood of winning, it's hooey that it increases the possibility of you winning. The possibility of you winning is controlled by whether or not you have purchased a ticket. If you have no tickets, then it is not possible for you to win, if you have a ticket it is possible for you to win, and if you have more than one ticket it becomes increasingly probable for you to win. You have met the criteria for your possible winnings to become probable winnings when you purchase your first ticket. Once you purchase that first ticket you increase the probability but not the possibility.

    Well, no, as long as there is no evidence it is an untested alternative hypothesis.

    Any hypothesis that is consistent with the evidence is possible. The collection of evidence is how we test an otherwise untested hypothesis.

    Well, no, not really, the stronger the evidence, the stronger the hypothesis. But that doesn't make it more possible or probable.

    Again, no, not really. The 'main stream hypothesis' is already that it is a conspiracy, the point of difference between it and the alternative hypotheses (including the no plane hypothesis) is who executed the conspiracy. ANY hypothesis dealing with the events of 9/11 is automatically a conspiracy because of the nature of the events. The question being asked is who executed the hypothesis, was it a group of muslim religious extremists? Or was it the American government?
  17. Arne Saknussemm trying to figure it all out Valued Senior Member

    Facts: Clueluss and I get along very well.P-boy and I may disagree, but we keep it civil, and actually agree on a lot; I have rarely interacted with DMOE. I think I congratulated him on completing his thesis months ago. You can ask any of them.
  18. Raymond Registered Member

    one of the worst destruction I've ever seen.
  19. cosmictraveler Be kind to yourself always. Valued Senior Member


    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  20. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    I'm at work atm, so I can't watch/listen to the video right now, so I'll just ask:

    Do/did they find the debris of the plane? If so, then the video I had posted was, for all intents, being willfully misleading by saying none was found.
  21. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    Fair enough - as I said, I don't generally take stock in conspiracy theories, but to me (who doesn't have any kind of degree in structural engineering, much less know what the composition of the pentagon is) the idea that the hole we saw was substantially smaller/different than the object striking it made sense; if that is just me applying faulty reasoning via my limited knowledge of the subject, then it is what it is and I look forward to being corrected and given an explanation on why what happened happened the way it did.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  22. leopold Valued Senior Member

    why try to figure out what to do with the passengers when you can slam them into the side of the pentagon?
    people boarded that plane, and they HAD to be killed. (they were witnesses)
    the simplest answer would be to, well, fly them into the pentagon.
    wow, i can just imagine somebody reading this that lost someone because of this.

    RIP robin.
  23. Russ_Watters Not a Trump supporter... Valued Senior Member


Share This Page