Is Freefall Proof of Controlled Demolition?

[Plu]

I actually read all of it. I needed the laugh this morning.

[AllPurposeAtheist]

And the plot thickens!  :-k
The last we heard of our hero he was trying to sell us on some bullshit conspiracy theory then from nowhere two planes crash into some buildings and HOLY JESUS! Two cross members collided and GOD made a conspiracy! Praise be jesus!  [-o<  [-o<

[AtheistMoFo]

1. We know what the official "theory" is, as does anyone with two working brain cells.
2. Hijacking a plane is not that difficult. It has happened countless times in the past. Here's some examples:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ai ... hijackings
3. We've proven that your hole filled "theory" is more unlikely and improbable than the sun setting in the North.
4. Even if everything you said about the official story being untrue was right, that does not automatically dictate that your baseless speculation is the only other way.

100 words or less sound byte:

1. Congratulations for having two working brain cells.
2. Never tried it, but take your word for it.
3. Ever been to the South Pole?
 HINT: watch the sunset and check your compas... (just sayin')
4. Therefore we do not need a true, unbiased investigation?  We should just close our eyes?  The Official Conspiracy Theory is demonstratedly pure bullshit.  Because of it, hundreds of thousand of people have died.  Just drop it?

[Thumpalumpacus]

Just a quick show of hands... How many of you actually read that wall of conspiratorial text?  :-k

I did.

The "descending 330° spiral" being "almost impossible" is nonsense.  Tex Johnston barrel-rolled the 707 prototype (a plane with a significantly worse thrust-weight ratio [4.75/1, vs the 757's 2.93/1]) in 1955.  The key to airframe integrity is to maintain g-forces inside the airframe's safe envelope, and to keep the turn steady.  330° descending spirals are a regular feature of landings occurring at West Coast airports such as LAX or SFO, because the prevailing winds demand an east-to-west approach, which  means planes from Hawaii (many of which are 757s) must make descending spirals routinely.

[AtheistMoFo]

100 words or less sound byte:

MoFo has been accused of racism for mentioning cave-dwelling arab muslim jihadists.  However, the idea that the terrorists were all arabs and all muslims and all jihadists is part of the Official Conspracy Theory, not invented by MoFo.  The contention that they lived in caves in Afghanistan, ditto.

[The Skeletal Atheist]

1. We know what the official "theory" is, as does anyone with two working brain cells.
2. Hijacking a plane is not that difficult. It has happened countless times in the past. Here's some examples:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ai ... hijackings
3. We've proven that your hole filled "theory" is more unlikely and improbable than the sun setting in the North.
4. Even if everything you said about the official story being untrue was right, that does not automatically dictate that your baseless speculation is the only other way.

100 words or less sound byte:

1. Congratulations for having two working brain cells.
2. Never tried it, but take your word for it.
3. Ever been to the South Pole?
 HINT: watch the sunset and check your compas... (just sayin')
4. Therefore we do not need a true, unbiased investigation?  We should just close our eyes?  The Official Conspiracy Theory is demonstratedly pure bullshit.  Because of it, hundreds of thousand of people have died.  Just drop it?

And if your "unbiased investigation" was conducted and came to the same conclusion as the "official conspiracy theory" would you drop the matter? I highly doubt it.

[AtheistMoFo]

The "descending 330° spiral" being "almost impossible" is nonsense. Tex Johnston barrel-rolled the 707 prototype (a plane with a significantly worse thrust-weight ratio [4.75/1, vs the 757's 2.93/1]) in 1955.

100 words or less sound byte:

Not to argue with your hypothesis, Thump, that test pilot Johnston's barrel roll is proof Hani Hanjour could execute a spiral descent from 7000 feet at an estimated speed of 530 mph, hitting a target with a 33-foot margin of error.  Even though HH could not be trusted behind the controls of a single engine Cessna, after all, he did have at least 46 minutes of flight time experience at the controls of a four-engine passenger jet.  Just think of all the practice dives he could have under his belt by that time.

Do you believe your own claims?

[AllPurposeAtheist]

I bet you're in on that fake snow conspiracy too, huh?
Snow won't burn now!  :shock:

http://www.clevelandleader.com/node/22132

[AtheistMoFo]

And if your "unbiased investigation" was conducted and came to the same conclusion as the "official conspiracy theory" would you drop the matter? I highly doubt it.

100 words or less sound byte:

On what basis do you doubt it?  Has there ever been an unbiased investigation of 9/11 in the past which I did not believe?  Try me.  Sign the petition for an unbiased investigation, and if/when one is made, we shall see.

The real question is, if there were an unbiased investigation that came to the conclusion there had to be at least a few insiders, would YOU accept the outcome?  Probably not!  If you can believe Hani Hanjour with 46 minutes flying time in a jumbo jet did what even pilots with hundreds of hours flying time say they can't.

[The Skeletal Atheist]

Nice job skipping around the question.

[AtheistMoFo]

Nice job skipping around the question.

100 words or less sound byte:

Sorry 'bout that.  Thought my reply would be clear even to a person with only two working brain cells, but apparently not.  So to answer your question, YES.  If an unbiased investigation that had thoroughly researched the 9/11 attacks came to the conclusion that Osama and a bunch of cave-dwelling arab muslim jihadists pulled off the attack without any help from the inside, I would give it up.

Your turn.  If the same investigation came to the conclusion that they DID have inside help, would you give up your fantasy about cave-dwelling arab muslim jihadists doing it on their own?

[The Skeletal Atheist]

I do apologize, but your earlier statement had said:

On what basis do you doubt it? Has there ever been an unbiased investigation of 9/11 in the past which I did not believe? Try me. Sign the petition for an unbiased investigation, and if/when one is made, we shall see.

I only saw "try me" and "we shall see". I didn't see a yes or no. If one is in there you could point them out. Otherwise it looks like you skipped the question with a vague non-answer.

As per your question: Certainly, though I think the extensive investigations by multiple organizations and individuals, not all of them connected to the government, were unbiased enough.

Now, who should fund this investigation? Can't be the federal government. If you think they'd allow such an investigation to take place under their watch after supposedly orchestrating the most complex, well pulled off conspiracy ever, then you're delusional.

Can't be the conspiracy nuts either. If they funded it the whole thing would be biased.

Edit: also loving the "cave dwelling" comments, like that is suppose to imply that they were dumbasses or something. Caves are the perfect natural bunkers when you don't have the resources to build a bunker, or when building a bunker would attract attention. They also make nice places to plan things clandestinely...things like terrorist attacks or something.

[AtheistMoFo]

I only saw "try me" and "we shall see". I didn't see a yes or no. If one is in there you could point them out. Otherwise it looks like you skipped the question with a vague non-answer.

There it is folks.  In all caps and in bold, but TSA has choosen not see it.  Even though MoFo limits his rebuttals to sound byte size of within 100 words or less so even a simpleton should be able to comprehend.  But why is MoFo not surprised?  Well, 'cuz TSA can't even see that 9/11 could not have been pulled off without help from the inside.  What should we expect from a person who only sees what he (she?) wants to see?

Can't be the conspiracy nuts either. If they funded it the whole thing would be biased.

Guess by "conspiracy nuts" you include yourself and all the other proponents of the Official Conspiracy Theory!

[Poison Tree]

Funny that, while trying to look objective, you come right out and say

9/11 could not have been pulled off without help from the inside.  

Sounds like you've definably made up you mind already, hypothetical unbiased investigation be damned.

But since you are so busy being outraged that Skeletal missed your answer to his first question, it seems you missed reading his second; who could head an investigation that you would accept as unbiased ?

What should we expect from a person who only sees what he (she?) wants to see?

indeed

[Sargon The Grape]

What should we expect from a person who only sees what he (she?) wants to see?

Take a look at your posts.