Skeptic Friends Network

Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?
Home | Forums | Active Topics | Active Polls | Register | FAQ | Contact Us  
  Connect: Chat | SFN Messenger | Buddy List | Members
Personalize: Profile | My Page | Forum Bookmarks  
 All Forums
 Our Skeptic Forums
 Conspiracy Theories
 Anyone for 9/11?
 New Topic  Topic Locked
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Previous Page | Next Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 13

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
25973 Posts

Posted - 05/31/2006 :  07:17:20   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by trogdor

Yeah, I saw one thing in the first movie that kinda sorta looked like something, But the skeptical side of me wants more. it seems very possible that the plane was moving fast enough not to be seen on a single frame, but it would be nice if it was captured on film.
The problem is that there's about a second between frames in those "videos," as you can tell by how "jerky" the movement of the car and gate are, in the second one down at that link. Nobody has any good, 30-frame-per-second video of the crash.

In that second video, the plane shows up on the right-hand side, just below the "horizon," about 25 seconds in, one frame before the explosion. At about 1:25 in, there's a car that shows up on the left side, and by 1:36 is cruising off to the right side of the images - look how far it gets each frame, and it was probably doing less than 100 MPH.

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page

ktesibios
SFN Regular

USA
505 Posts

Posted - 05/31/2006 :  12:37:53   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send ktesibios a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.

The problem is that there's about a second between frames in those "videos," as you can tell by how "jerky" the movement of the car and gate are, in the second one down at that link. Nobody has any good, 30-frame-per-second video of the crash.



Unfortunately, that's normal for the time-lapse VCRs which are commonly used to log security camera images. The camera runs at the normal frame rate (29.97 fps in the USA), but the recorder only captures every nth frame. For example, the security VCRs where I work, if they're set to the "96 hour" setting, only record every 17th frame, for an effective frame rate of about 1.76 fps, which allows a standard T120 VHS cassette to run for a bit over 100 hours before it has to be changed.

Nowadays there are digital recorders which use data compression (usually JPEG) to capture full-motion video without using up insane amounts of hard disk space, but they're pretty new and haven't become ubiquitous like those little time-lapse tape machines.

It might be that really high-security areas in the Pentagon are surveilled in HDTV with 5.1 surround sound, but a cam for a parking lot entrance isn't likely to need or get that kind of treatment.

CTers are bound to claim that the fact that the Pentagon videos don't show a crystal clear image of a 757 hitting the building is some sort of proof of their "no Boeing" fantasies, but that ignores the fact that the conclusion that AA77 hit the Pentagon doesn't rest on only one piece of evidence any more than the authenticity of the Apollo landings depends on a single photograph.

"The Republican agenda is to turn the United States into a third-world shithole." -P.Z.Myers
Go to Top of Page

verlch
SFN Regular

781 Posts

Posted - 06/01/2006 :  11:12:29   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Send verlch an AOL message Send verlch a Private Message
But still the plane goes by so fast, its almost like it was scribbled out, so we couldn't make anything out.

The gas station, and the hotel would provide even better footage.

I've found a white plane present on all places where the planes were hijacked, they were trailing all planes, at the Pentagon, in Pennsylvania, and one of the WTC impacts. When they were trailing the planes, they looked like one plane, and my theory aswell, is when they were trailing the planes, they were able to mock a hijacking. I believe that a gas put all the people on the plane asleep, and they remote controlling flew the planes into their targets.

Tom Spinelli (Indian Lake, 1 ˝ miles):
Technician at Indian Lake Marina.
"I saw the white plane," he said.
"It was flying around all over the place like it was looking for something. I saw it before and after the crash."
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/page.cfm?objectid=...

I saw that white plane in plenty of the clips.

All in all there are twelve eyewitnesses who observe the white jet.
I wasn't able to pinpoint the exact locations of the following eyewitnesses who claimed to have seen a white jet as well: Susan Mcelwain, Kathy Blades, Dale Browning, Susan Custer, Robin Doppstadt and Bobby Lambert.

Dale Browning who witnessed the white plane, “the damndest darn thing”, remarked:
“Everybody's seen this thing in the sky, but no one can tell us what it is."
(Bergen Record, 9/14/01)

Here is what the FBI has to give as explanation:
“The FBI's later explanation for the white jet was that a passing civilian Fairchild Falcon 20 jet was asked to descend from 34,000ft to 5,000ft some minutes after the crash to give co-ordinates for the site. The plane and pilot have never been produced or identified.”
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/page.cfm?objectid=...

http://www.the7thfire.com/Politics%20and%20History/Fairytale.html

There is enough holes to burn down the city, in this story!

What came first the chicken or the egg?

How do plants exist without bugs in the soil, and bugs in the soil without plants producing oxygen?

There are no atheists in foxholes

Underlying the evolutionary theory is not just the classic "stuff" of science — conclusions arrived at through prolonged observation and experimentation. Evolution is first an atheistic, materialistic world view. In other words, the primary reason for its acceptance has little to do with the evidence for or against it. Evolution is accepted because men are atheists by faith and thus interpret the evidence to cor-respond to their naturalistic philosophy.

For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. II Timothy 4:3,4

II Thess. 2:11 And for this cause God shall
send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:

You can not see the 'wind', but you can see its effect!!!!

Evolution was caused by genetic mistakes at each stage?

Radical Evolution has 500 million years to find fossils of fictional drawings of (hard core)missing links, yet they find none.

We have not seen such moral darkness since the dark ages, coencides with
teaching evolution in schools. (Moral darkness)

For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places, EPH 6:12.

"Thus, many scientists embracing naturalism find themselves in the seeming dilemma recently articulated by biochemist Franklin Harold: "We should reject, as a matter of principle, the substitution of intelligent design for the dialogue of chance and necessity [i.e., Darwinian evolution]; but we must concede that there are presently no detailed Darwinian accounts of the evolution of any biochemical system, only a variety of wishful speculations."
Go to Top of Page

Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie

USA
4826 Posts

Posted - 06/01/2006 :  11:26:10   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Valiant Dancer's Homepage Send Valiant Dancer a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by verlch

But still the plane goes by so fast, its almost like it was scribbled out, so we couldn't make anything out.

The gas station, and the hotel would provide even better footage.

I've found a white plane present on all places where the planes were hijacked, they were trailing all planes, at the Pentagon, in Pennsylvania, and one of the WTC impacts. When they were trailing the planes, they looked like one plane, and my theory aswell, is when they were trailing the planes, they were able to mock a hijacking. I believe that a gas put all the people on the plane asleep, and they remote controlling flew the planes into their targets.

Tom Spinelli (Indian Lake, 1 ˝ miles):
Technician at Indian Lake Marina.
"I saw the white plane," he said.
"It was flying around all over the place like it was looking for something. I saw it before and after the crash."
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/page.cfm?objectid=...

I saw that white plane in plenty of the clips.

All in all there are twelve eyewitnesses who observe the white jet.
I wasn't able to pinpoint the exact locations of the following eyewitnesses who claimed to have seen a white jet as well: Susan Mcelwain, Kathy Blades, Dale Browning, Susan Custer, Robin Doppstadt and Bobby Lambert.

Dale Browning who witnessed the white plane, “the damndest darn thing”, remarked:
“Everybody's seen this thing in the sky, but no one can tell us what it is."
(Bergen Record, 9/14/01)

Here is what the FBI has to give as explanation:
“The FBI's later explanation for the white jet was that a passing civilian Fairchild Falcon 20 jet was asked to descend from 34,000ft to 5,000ft some minutes after the crash to give co-ordinates for the site. The plane and pilot have never been produced or identified.”
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/page.cfm?objectid=...

http://www.the7thfire.com/Politics%20and%20History/Fairytale.html

There is enough holes to burn down the city, in this story!



There's enough holes in your absurd theory for a lazy crack whore hippo to comfortably stumble through.

OK, for starts.

1) A nerve agent or incapacitating gas that not only causes paralysis, but does so immediately before the pilots or passengers are able to complain about it. One does not exist.
2) Phone conversations with the passengers aboard flight 93 would have to be faked and convincingly so to family members.

Really, this goes way over the top on the crackpot scale. I am impressed, V. This is a lot more complex and unreasonable than the other tripe you were championing.

Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils

Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion
Go to Top of Page

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
25973 Posts

Posted - 06/01/2006 :  11:50:14   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by verlch

But still the plane goes by so fast, its almost like it was scribbled out, so we couldn't make anything out.
It looks like it was "scribbled out," so therefore it was "scribbled out?" Is that what you're trying to get at here?
quote:
The gas station, and the hotel would provide even better footage.
What gas station, and what hotel, had cameras trained on the West side of the Pentagon on the morning of 9/11?

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page

verlch
SFN Regular

781 Posts

Posted - 06/01/2006 :  16:47:40   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Send verlch an AOL message Send verlch a Private Message
The gas station and hotel had their video tapes confiscated moments after the crash.

http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/footage.html

There that is, the FBI was there within minutes to confiscate the video tape.

What came first the chicken or the egg?

How do plants exist without bugs in the soil, and bugs in the soil without plants producing oxygen?

There are no atheists in foxholes

Underlying the evolutionary theory is not just the classic "stuff" of science — conclusions arrived at through prolonged observation and experimentation. Evolution is first an atheistic, materialistic world view. In other words, the primary reason for its acceptance has little to do with the evidence for or against it. Evolution is accepted because men are atheists by faith and thus interpret the evidence to cor-respond to their naturalistic philosophy.

For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. II Timothy 4:3,4

II Thess. 2:11 And for this cause God shall
send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:

You can not see the 'wind', but you can see its effect!!!!

Evolution was caused by genetic mistakes at each stage?

Radical Evolution has 500 million years to find fossils of fictional drawings of (hard core)missing links, yet they find none.

We have not seen such moral darkness since the dark ages, coencides with
teaching evolution in schools. (Moral darkness)

For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places, EPH 6:12.

"Thus, many scientists embracing naturalism find themselves in the seeming dilemma recently articulated by biochemist Franklin Harold: "We should reject, as a matter of principle, the substitution of intelligent design for the dialogue of chance and necessity [i.e., Darwinian evolution]; but we must concede that there are presently no detailed Darwinian accounts of the evolution of any biochemical system, only a variety of wishful speculations."
Go to Top of Page

GeeMack
SFN Regular

USA
1093 Posts

Posted - 06/01/2006 :  17:45:59   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send GeeMack a Private Message
In the article cited by verlch (Pentagon Attack Footage) we read, "According to Jose Velasquez, who was working at the gas station at the time of the attack, the station's security cameras would have captured the attack."

In the National Geographic article used as a source for that piece (Three Months On, Tension Lingers Near the Pentagon) we read, "Velasquez says the gas station's security cameras are close enough to the Pentagon to have recorded the moment of impact."

The difference between "cameras would have captured the attack" and "cameras are close enough [...] to have recorded the moment of impact" is significant indeed. But following the research one step closer to the source would have required clicking on one more link and actually reading one more article. And as we've all seen time and again here, that is way more effort than verlch seems willing to invest.

And the hotel? The article cited by verlch describes it as, "... a hotel near the Pentagon..." It also shows a photo of a (presumably Sheraton) hotel with the caption, "The Sheraton National Hotel may be the hotel from which the FBI seized a CCTV recording." That's some pretty shitty research, verlch. It may be good enough for conspiracy theory nutcases like yourself, but it surely ain't good enough for sane, intelligent, clear thinking people like most of the rest of us here.

Dave's question was, "What gas station, and what hotel, had cameras trained on the West side of the Pentagon on the morning of 9/11?" I think it's obvious by verlch's reply that he doesn't have the slightest clue.
Go to Top of Page

verlch
SFN Regular

781 Posts

Posted - 06/01/2006 :  18:05:32   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Send verlch an AOL message Send verlch a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by GeeMack

In the article cited by verlch (Pentagon Attack Footage) we read, "According to Jose Velasquez, who was working at the gas station at the time of the attack, the station's security cameras would have captured the attack."

In the National Geographic article used as a source for that piece (Three Months On, Tension Lingers Near the Pentagon) we read, "Velasquez says the gas station's security cameras are close enough to the Pentagon to have recorded the moment of impact."

The difference between "cameras would have captured the attack" and "cameras are close enough [...] to have recorded the moment of impact" is significant indeed. But following the research one step closer to the source would have required clicking on one more link and actually reading one more article. And as we've all seen time and again here, that is way more effort than verlch seems willing to invest.

And the hotel? The article cited by verlch describes it as, "... a hotel near the Pentagon..." It also shows a photo of a (presumably Sheraton) hotel with the caption, "The Sheraton National Hotel may be the hotel from which the FBI seized a CCTV recording." That's some pretty shitty research, verlch. It may be good enough for conspiracy theory nutcases like yourself, but it surely ain't good enough for sane, intelligent, clear thinking people like most of the rest of us here.

Dave's question was, "What gas station, and what hotel, had cameras trained on the West side of the Pentagon on the morning of 9/11?" I think it's obvious by verlch's reply that he doesn't have the slightest clue.




How would we ever know, just like all the missing black boxes, and how are we to go over the WTC impact steel frame? When it is whisked off to China for recycling? It just doesn't work out that well!!!

http://www.counterpunch.org/lindorff12202005.html

How about all them black boxes!!! They would certainly tell a tail, if we could hear them!!!

How long did it take to come out with them, and how much time did they have to tamper with them?
Edited by - verlch on 06/01/2006 18:11:04
Go to Top of Page

Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist

USA
4954 Posts

Posted - 06/01/2006 :  18:11:30   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Cuneiformist a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by verlch

The gas station and hotel had their video tapes confiscated moments after the crash.

http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/footage.html

There that is, the FBI was there within minutes to confiscate the video tape.



Interesting. But according to the footnotes, the gas station was open only to the government, and of course it was close to the Pentagon. The person quoted said it was taken "within minutes" but it's hard to take that at face value.

Of course, since government agents doubtlessly were aware of serious problems since the attacks in NY (which were earlier), hearing that the FBI was at a place in DC after already being on alert is not a surprise. The real question is if they were ready to take cameras in central Iowa on a few minutes' notice...
Go to Top of Page

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
25973 Posts

Posted - 06/01/2006 :  19:31:03   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by verlch

The gas station and hotel had their video tapes confiscated moments after the crash.

http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/footage.html

There that is, the FBI was there within minutes to confiscate the video tape.
And? Does that mean that there's anything on those tapes?

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
25973 Posts

Posted - 06/01/2006 :  19:41:30   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message
Oh, and the Sheraton National Hotel looks to be over a mile away from the Pentagon. Any security camera placed to get a clear view of the plane's flight into the building would be a waste of resources for the hotel. Why would there be cameras taking images of huge swaths of sky and other properties? The reference for the hotel claim no longer even functions.

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
25973 Posts

Posted - 06/01/2006 :  19:43:35   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by verlch

How about all them black boxes!!! They would certainly tell a tail, if we could hear them!!!
How do you know that they'd show anything different from the "official story?"
quote:
How long did it take to come out with them, and how much time did they have to tamper with them?
How do you know that anyone tampered with them?

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page

verlch
SFN Regular

781 Posts

Posted - 06/01/2006 :  19:53:30   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Send verlch an AOL message Send verlch a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.

quote:
Originally posted by verlch

How about all them black boxes!!! They would certainly tell a tail, if we could hear them!!!
How do you know that they'd show anything different from the "official story?"
quote:
How long did it take to come out with them, and how much time did they have to tamper with them?
How do you know that anyone tampered with them?



First of all, I'm not going to be lead to believe their isn't a cover up, until I can examine all the wreckage from WTC I and II and the others. Until I can sift through the wreckage and see the planes, parts and serial numbers. To ensure that the right plane hit the building and not some neocon New World Order jet sent to carry out terrorist attacks against their own people.

Not until I can sift through the bones in Pennsylvania, and figure out why those high jackers were found alive and not DEAD, it never ceased to amaze me how those pictures of the hijackers came out so quickly and then how my heart sunk when I learned they were not DEAD. There are video's of these men entering the airports, etc.

For all these fuck ups, why was nobody held accountable?

Where are the chemical weapons from Iraq? Why is Saddam Hussein paraded around and not given a speedy trial? Is he showing the world what dishing the New World Order is like? I think that is the message I am receiving. Don't corporate, and spend your life in prison, American style.

All I have is questions that need to be addressed, attacking me personally gives me credibility.


What came first the chicken or the egg?

How do plants exist without bugs in the soil, and bugs in the soil without plants producing oxygen?

There are no atheists in foxholes

Underlying the evolutionary theory is not just the classic "stuff" of science — conclusions arrived at through prolonged observation and experimentation. Evolution is first an atheistic, materialistic world view. In other words, the primary reason for its acceptance has little to do with the evidence for or against it. Evolution is accepted because men are atheists by faith and thus interpret the evidence to cor-respond to their naturalistic philosophy.

For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. II Timothy 4:3,4

II Thess. 2:11 And for this cause God shall
send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:

You can not see the 'wind', but you can see its effect!!!!

Evolution was caused by genetic mistakes at each stage?

Radical Evolution has 500 million years to find fossils of fictional drawings of (hard core)missing links, yet they find none.

We have not seen such moral darkness since the dark ages, coencides with
teaching evolution in schools. (Moral darkness)

For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places, EPH 6:12.

"Thus, many scientists embracing naturalism find themselves in the seeming dilemma recently articulated by biochemist Franklin Harold: "We should reject, as a matter of principle, the substitution of intelligent design for the dialogue of chance and necessity [i.e., Darwinian evolution]; but we must concede that there are presently no detailed Darwinian accounts of the evolution of any biochemical system, only a variety of wishful speculations."
Go to Top of Page

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
25973 Posts

Posted - 06/01/2006 :  20:13:20   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by verlch

First of all, I'm not going to be lead to believe their isn't a cover up, until I can examine all the wreckage from WTC I and II and the others.
I see: you believe that the US citizens which make up the government are guilty until proven innocent.
quote:
Where are the chemical weapons from Iraq?
Good question. It has absolutely nothing to do with 9/11, but it's still a good question.
quote:
All I have is questions that need to be addressed, attacking me personally gives me credibility.
And I asked questions in return. Your credibility isn't in question, since your questions aren't evidence of anything at all. Failing to answer my questions simply means that your questions are rooted in ignorance, and intended not to further any knowledge about the 9/11 attacks, but instead are intended to further your own global sociopolitical viewpoint. In other words, no answers to your questions will ever be sufficient for you to the "lead [sic] to believe" anything other than what you want to believe, like that there exists a conspiracy to form a "New World Order."

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page

verlch
SFN Regular

781 Posts

Posted - 06/01/2006 :  20:29:38   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Send verlch an AOL message Send verlch a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.

quote:
Originally posted by verlch

How about all them black boxes!!! They would certainly tell a tail, if we could hear them!!!
How do you know that they'd show anything different from the "official story?"
quote:
How long did it take to come out with them, and how much time did they have to tamper with them?
How do you know that anyone tampered with them?



I meant to say, that it took years for the tapes to be listened to by the victims families. Another theory, I think that gave them time to make the tapes believable.
Edited by - verlch on 06/01/2006 20:30:34
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 13 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Previous Page | Next Page
 New Topic  Topic Locked
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Jump To:

The mission of the Skeptic Friends Network is to promote skepticism, critical thinking, science and logic as the best methods for evaluating all claims of fact, and we invite active participation by our members to create a skeptical community with a wide variety of viewpoints and expertise.


Home | Skeptic Forums | Skeptic Summary | The Kil Report | Creation/Evolution | Rationally Speaking | Skeptillaneous | About Skepticism | Fan Mail | Claims List | Calendar & Events | Skeptic Links | Book Reviews | Gift Shop | SFN on Facebook | Staff | Contact Us

Skeptic Friends Network
© 2008 Skeptic Friends Network Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 1.23 seconds.
Powered by @tomic Studio
Snitz Forums 2000