Was 9/11 a conspiracy??

Was 9/11 a conspiracy??

Created by djhixx on Oct 13, 2007

55,132 votes

Click on an option to vote

yes

no

well, im not sure

“SHEEN IS A LIAR”

Since: Dec 10

Lincoln, NE

#281045 Sep 17, 2014
Can you imagine how PorkShill talks to his kids when they say something he doesnt agree with ??
Porkpie Hat wrote:
<quoted text>
You never did have any originality pedo-tommy!
Just more proof you can't think for yourself.
Thanks for playing moron!
Fougera!
Hahahahahaha!!!!
You bloody mindless dolt!

“SHEEN IS A LIAR”

Since: Dec 10

Lincoln, NE

#281046 Sep 17, 2014
I guess Porky is done being a sycophant to real engineers ....... he now has time to inpart his wisdom on this forum
Porkpie Hat wrote:
<quoted text>
You never did have any originality pedo-tommy!
Just more proof you can't think for yourself.
Thanks for playing moron!
Fougera!
Hahahahahaha!!!!
You bloody mindless dolt!

“SHEEN IS A LIAR”

Since: Dec 10

Lincoln, NE

#281047 Sep 17, 2014
What would Sheen ever do if the copy and paste buttons were removed from his computer ??
Charlie Sheen wrote:
<quoted text>
about 89 The amount of eye witnesses I gathered who stated they saw an object crash into the Pentagon. The vast majority of the still available ones.
at least 45 The amount of eye witnesses who reported seeing a plane and described it with words like:'airliner','big','silver' ,'roaring', etc.
at least 23 The amount of eye witnesses who specifically said they saw an American Airlines jet. In all cases a large jet.
at least 22 The amount of witnesses who reported the noise of the plane was very loud to deafening.
at least 17 The amount of eye witnesses who stated they saw a plane running down light poles when crossing the highways.
at least 12 The amount of eye witnesses who stated they saw and heard the plane increase its throttle at the last seconds.
at least 11 The amount of eye witnesses who stated they saw a C-130H flying 30 seconds behind a jetliner.
at least 5 The amount of eye witnesses who specifically stated they saw the plane had its gear up.
at least 2 The amount of eye witnesses who stated that they saw a small corporate jet, without doing any creative interpretating [sic] of the witness accounts.
at least 0 The amount of eye witnesses who stated they saw a missile. What the person thought he heard isn't relevant!
at least 0 The amount of eye witnesses who stated they saw a military jet fighter at the time of the crash.
at least 0 The amount of eye witnesses who stated they saw a Global Hawk at the time of the crash.
http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/analysis...
onemale

Charleston, IL

#281048 Sep 17, 2014
New study from Pilots for 9/11 Truth: No Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon:
Pilots for 9/11 Truth obtained black box data from the government under the Freedom of Information Act for AA Flight 77. Analysis of the data contradicts the official account in direction, approach, and altitude. The plane was too high to hit lamp posts and would have flown over the Pentagon, not impacted with its ground floor. This result confirms and strengthens the previous findings of Scholars for 9/11 Truth that no Boeing 757 hit the buillding.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/new-study-from-p...
onemale

Charleston, IL

#281049 Sep 17, 2014
JudgeNJury wrote:
I guess Porky is done being a sycophant to real engineers ....... he now has time to inpart his wisdom on this forum
<quoted text>
The piggy flunked science class and is a scientist wanna be
Truth be known he only took on semester and then flunked out, and now thinks he's a scientist.
He ignores a real to life plane crash test.
He thinks a phoney formula he found in the internet proves everything.
I regard him as a bad smell.
onemale

Charleston, IL

#281050 Sep 17, 2014
JudgeNJury wrote:
Can you imagine how PorkShill talks to his kids when they say something he doesnt agree with ??
<quoted text>
The piggy does come off as a psychopath...
and when you look at it in that way... the piggy is verbally abusing his kids
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#281052 Sep 17, 2014
JudgeNJury wrote:
I guess Porky is done being a sycophant to real engineers ....... he now has time to inpart his wisdom on this forum
<quoted text>
Says pedo Tommy!
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#281053 Sep 17, 2014
JudgeNJury wrote:
Sheen - the most UNinteresting man in the world;

His mother has a picture of him on her dresser, but it is actually a photo of some other child.
That no doubt gets you hard pedo Tommy!
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#281055 Sep 17, 2014
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>
The piggy does come off as a psychopath...
and when you look at it in that way... the piggy is verbally abusing his kids
Like you physically abused your mother?
onemale

Charleston, IL

#281056 Sep 17, 2014
Charlie Sheen wrote:
<quoted text>
Not a direct missile attack Fetal boy and aluminum is way softer than steel, you are rather dumb son of the town soak and jizz bank.
That has absolutely nothing to do with my post ya dippy liar.
onemale

Charleston, IL

#281057 Sep 17, 2014
The debwunkers really hate this one:
New study from Pilots for 9/11 Truth: No Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon:
Pilots for 9/11 Truth obtained black box data from the government under the Freedom of Information Act for AA Flight 77. Analysis of the data contradicts the official account in direction, approach, and altitude. The plane was too high to hit lamp posts and would have flown over the Pentagon, not impacted with its ground floor. This result confirms and strengthens the previous findings of Scholars for 9/11 Truth that no Boeing 757 hit the buillding.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/new-study-from-p...
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#281058 Sep 17, 2014
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>
He thinks a phoney formula he found in the internet proves everything.
Can you tell us what is phoney about it mother banger?

THOUGHT NOT!

“DECEPTION = MOST POWERFUL ”

Since: Jul 11

POLITICAL FORCE ON THE PLANET

#281059 Sep 17, 2014
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
I believe flight 77 was either raptured or went to Fantasy Island.
What would Jesus say ?
.
Drop to your knees sewerwater, squeeze your closed eyes real tight, pray really hard, and Jesus will tell you which .
.
Uh Huh Eh !

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#281061 Sep 17, 2014
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
9/11 Experiments: The Mysterious Eutectic Steel
.
Did rubble from the WTC really cause those eutectic formations ,as we were led to believe?
.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =VvQDFV1HINwXX#t=108
.
Uh Huh Eh !
No, like "key fuel fires melted steel", your claim that anyone says "rubble cause the eutectic formations" is just another fail since the only ones who claim that is morons like you!

Oh elevator boy-sheep-DNA 20 pilots YOUNG EARTH CREATIONIST STREET CORNER JEEBUS aka Mr. I don't know what eutectic means but da ebil US gub'ment didit!
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#281062 Sep 17, 2014
onemale wrote:
The debwunkers really hate this one:
New study from Pilots for 9/11 Truth: No Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon:
Pilots for 9/11 Truth obtained black box data from the government under the Freedom of Information Act for AA Flight 77. Analysis of the data contradicts the official account in direction, approach, and altitude. The plane was too high to hit lamp posts and would have flown over the Pentagon, not impacted with its ground floor. This result confirms and strengthens the previous findings of Scholars for 9/11 Truth that no Boeing 757 hit the buillding.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/new-study-from-p...
False offspring of the town jizz bucket, the myth is the signal is constant, it is not, the goofs though the last ping should have been when the plane was destroyed.
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#281063 Sep 17, 2014
onemale wrote:
The debwunkers really hate this one:
New study from Pilots for 9/11 Truth: No Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon:
Pilots for 9/11 Truth obtained black box data from the government under the Freedom of Information Act for AA Flight 77. Analysis of the data contradicts the official account in direction, approach, and altitude. The plane was too high to hit lamp posts and would have flown over the Pentagon, not impacted with its ground floor. This result confirms and strengthens the previous findings of Scholars for 9/11 Truth that no Boeing 757 hit the buillding.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/new-study-from-p...
Wrong again mother lover.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search...
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#281064 Sep 17, 2014
onemale wrote:
The debwunkers really hate this one:
Pilots for 9/11 Truth obtained black box data from the government under the Freedom of Information Act for AA Flight 77.
The single most important point of this entire document is to be found here: These frames represent just that: frames. The vertical axis represents the number of samples taken during that frame, not the time those samples were taken. Many conspiracy theorists, incorrectly, believe that each row of this file represents 1/8 of a second.

The flawed interpretation is quickly disposed of by realizing a few key pieces of evidence. First of all, if you look at the longitudinal acceleration data above, you will see that it is sampled 4 times, and then the other 4 rows are blank. Without getting into the technical details, sampling at 0, 1/8, 2/8 and 3/8, and then not sampling again until 8/8 is absolutely silly. In digital signal processing, sampling out-of-phase like this would result in horrible aliasing effects and poorer reconstructed signal quality. It requires the same amount of effort, and the same amount of bandwidth to sample in equally spaced intervals, and the data is far superior. There is absolutely no way that the data was sampled “out-of-phase” like the incorrect interpretation would imply.

The second major clue is that our serial multiplexed signal is a constant bit-rate signal. This means that the same amount of data flows during the same period of time, at all times. All data points in this file are squished towards the top of the frame. This would mean much more data has to travel out from 0 to 1/8 then has to travel from 6/8 to 7/8. This violates the principle of constant bit-rate.

The key point is worth reemphasizing, so I will do it again: the proper interpretation of each frame of in the CSV file is that N samples were taken during that second. We know nothing about the time of these samples other than the fact they were taken during the frame, and are equally spaced. Pressure altitude could have been sampled at 0.0 or 0.99, and they would both show up exactly the same in the CSV file.

This means we can calculate an error rate, in time, for each data point, due entirely to not knowing where in the frame this particular data-point was recorded. For a data-point sampled at 1Hz, like pressure altitude, that sample could have occurred at any point from 8:19:00 to 8:19:01. This is an error range of 1 second. A similar calculation can be done to be show that the maximum error range is equal to the time period between samples. Samples done at 8Hz have an error range of 0.125s, and 4Hz has 0.25s, and so on.

Also note that the timestamps of the major frames have been processed from the original data (the NTSB FDR report mentions this on page 3). There is no way to know the error in these timestamps, nor do we know the precision. It is a mistake to try to correlate these timestamps with the outside world (like official time of impacts).
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#281065 Sep 17, 2014
The Final 1 to 2 Seconds

Given that the data was compressed, and synched, it’s very likely that any frames that were not complete would be difficult to recover, if even recoverable at all. The implication of this is quite simple, and that is the FDR data in the CSV file “runs out” well before the plane actually hits.

This means that 9:37:44 was the last, complete frame, gathered by the recorder. That puts the likely time of impact in the 9:37:45-6 range, and possibly even into the 9:37:46-7 timeframe. The presence of 9:37:46 in this data suggests that its timestamp may have made it onto the tape. How is that possible if 9:37:45 is not a complete frame? That’s a good question, but a reasonable hypothesis has to do with the storage mechanism used. Solid State Recorders, like all medium, are quite unpredictable if they fail during write operations. The actual area being used to record data can very easily be corrupted if power fails while writing. It’s plausible that the crash caused problems in and around this local area of data, causing corruption of the 9:37:45 data frame (again, changing a single bit in a synch word is enough to cause software to completely choke).

The moral of the story here is that the FDR data runs out anywhere from up to 2 seconds before the plane actually crashed into the Pentagon.
onemale

Charleston, IL

#281066 Sep 17, 2014
Sorry Charlie has proven the debwunkers really hate this one:
New study from Pilots for 9/11 Truth: No Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon:
Pilots for 9/11 Truth obtained black box data from the government under the Freedom of Information Act for AA Flight 77. Analysis of the data contradicts the official account in direction, approach, and altitude. The plane was too high to hit lamp posts and would have flown over the Pentagon, not impacted with its ground floor. This result confirms and strengthens the previous findings of Scholars for 9/11 Truth that no Boeing 757 hit the buillding.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/new-study-from-p...
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#281067 Sep 17, 2014
onemale wrote:
Sorry Charlie has proven the debwunkers really hate this one:
New study from Pilots for 9/11 Truth: No Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon:
Pilots for 9/11 Truth obtained black box data from the government under the Freedom of Information Act for AA Flight 77. Analysis of the data contradicts the official account in direction, approach, and altitude. The plane was too high to hit lamp posts and would have flown over the Pentagon, not impacted with its ground floor. This result confirms and strengthens the previous findings of Scholars for 9/11 Truth that no Boeing 757 hit the buillding.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/new-study-from-p...
Prove any of the above wrong or ask mom when she sobers up and gets dressed.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing 29 min old_moose 30,572
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 35 min truth 687,142
News Costa Mesa man, 50, sentenced to 25 years to li... 1 hr Voice of Reason 3
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 3 hr Aerobatty 987,071
Any horny girls with snapchat looking for fun (Oct '16) 9 hr skurrrrallla 14
Girl snapchat names (Feb '15) 9 hr meetsnapgirls 3
Looking for girls to snapchat 9 hr meetsnapgirls 4
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 11 hr Seentheotherside 619,787
More from around the web