Nothing new here, however...

reply to post by trebor451


A star for you!

That is a really good summary of the main points, and i think what the OP was looking for. However in the same instance it highlights the need for a consensus among the conspiracy community about what really happened. And the nature of conspiracies is such that no one theory will ever be accepted as the truth.

Originally posted by wcitizen
But their secrecy and refusal to enter into meaningful dialogue simply fuels suspicions. Add to this the fact that evidence that Saddam's WMD was knowingly distorted/maufactured, and that many competent legal specialists consider the war in Iraq to have been illegal...means that AT THE VERY LEAST, there are questions to which WE ALL SHOULD BE DEMANDING ANSWERS.

DING DING DING!!! Give that man a cigar! He's nailed it, right there, the entire rationale for these crackpoit conspiracy claims- the secrecy and withholding of information of the gov't. Now, as someone who sees that muslim fundamentalists are causing all sorts of mischief above and beyond the 9/11 attack, I can acknowledge that secrecy is necessary. We can't blurt out how we know Bin Laden was behind the attack any more than Eisenhower couldn't expose the names of the French resistance agents giving us information on the Germans or the FBI announcing they're wire tapping a mafia warlord's telephone- it will certainly impact our ability to continue to collect information on them. If you ask me, it's the entire reason why we haven't caught bin laden yet- some genius blurted out we were eavesdropping on his cell phone conversations and we can see his movements by satellite, so he stopped using his cell phone and only moved when the satellites weren't overhead.

Problem is, such secrecy is naturally inciting all sorts of paranoia among the conspiracy people, and they're coming up with all sorts of imaginative explanations on their own from simple paranoia to some really disturbed stuff.

In my understanding, if there is democracy (which I don't believe there is), it should be the former. So, if the people demand to know the facts, demand the release of documents, the Govermnet should comply.

Even to the point where it will cost other people their lives? Not too long ago, a chinese dissident once released a top secret internal gov't memo to western journalists, and Yahoo blurted out where the memo came from. Thanks to Yahoo, that dissident is still in a chinese concentration camp as we speak.

Our right to know what's going on ends where the need of the gov't to keep certain things secret begins.

Originally posted by trebor451
Cruise missiles were used instead of airplanes;

Disinformation.

Originally posted by trebor451
the airplanes were indeed airplanes but were remote-controlled;

It's very possible.

Originally posted by trebor451
the airplanes were beefed-up military stock aircraft;

This is also very possible.

Originally posted by trebor451
the airplanes fired a missile into the buildings a nanosecond before impact;

Disinformation.

Originally posted by trebor451
the airplanes has special pods attached to their undercarriage;

Disinformation.

Originally posted by trebor451
the airplanes had “forward spraying fuel sprayers” installed to help enhance the explosion of jet fuel;

Disinformation.

Originally posted by trebor451
there were NO AIRPLANES AT ALL;

As far as the WTC is concerned: disinformation.

Originally posted by trebor451
it was a Global Hawk;

Disinformation.

Originally posted by trebor451
it was an A-3 Skywarrior;

Disinformation.

Originally posted by trebor451
it was a painted-up KC-135 Tanker aircraft;

As far as the WTC is concerned, disinformation. One can verify that the second plane that hit was a 767-200 with minimal research.

Originally posted by trebor451
it was done with holograms;

Disinformation.

Originally posted by trebor451
there were missiles fired from the Woolworth Building in NYC;

Disinformation.

Originally posted by trebor451
pre-set charges blew the holes in the WTC to LOOK like an airplane hit;

Disinformation.

Originally posted by trebor451
the media (ALL the media) is in on the charade;

Disinformation.

Originally posted by trebor451
the aircraft/missiles/whatever were invisible;

Disinformation.

Originally posted by trebor451
the various videos of the WTC2 impacts do not match up because…well…ummm….even though they were filmed from….ummm…different locations….;

Disinformation.

Originally posted by trebor451
the passengers never existed;

It's possible. Read the "Operation Northwoods" documents.

Originally posted by trebor451
the passengers existed but were loaded up onto another aircraft and were shot down over the Atlantic;

Disinformation.

Originally posted by trebor451
The passengers were in on it;

Disinformation.

Originally posted by trebor451
the passengers were gassed;

Disinformation.

Originally posted by trebor451
the passengers are living in exile somewhere;

Disinformation.

Originally posted by trebor451
Barbara Olson (wife of former Solicitor General Ted Olson and a passenger on flight 77 that SUPPOSEDLY hit the Pentagon) was arrested in September of last year in Germany or Poland or West Snoblovia with a bajillion counterfeit lira (never mind the fact that Italy has not used lira since 2002);

Disinformation.

Originally posted by trebor451
the steel melted;

That's a fact based off of dozens of witness reports, and images of the molten steel.

Originally posted by trebor451
the steel didn’t melt but buckled;

Huh?

Originally posted by trebor451
the steel didn’t melt or buckle, it was cut by thermite;

Disinformation.

Originally posted by trebor451
it wasn’t thermite, it was thermate;

At minimum thermate could have been used somehow. When you go look up "thermate" and what it does to steel/iron, it's the exact description that FEMA gave in it's report when they tested steel samples from the WTC.

Originally posted by trebor451
It wasn't thermate, it was nano-thermate;

Also possible as lab tests on the WTC dust have preliminarily shown.

Originally posted by trebor451
the steel didn't melt or buckle or was cut by thermite/thermate/nano-thermate, it was dustified;

Disinformation.

Originally posted by trebor451
it was a bomb in a truck carried up in an elevator;

Disinformation.

Originally posted by trebor451
controlled demolition is what brought the towers down;

Absolutely, without a doubt.

Originally posted by trebor451
a small nuclear bomb is what brought the towers down;

Disinformation.

Originally posted by trebor451
lasers are what brought the towers down;

Disinformation.

Originally posted by trebor451
a particle beam is what brought the towers down;

Disinformation.

Originally posted by trebor451
direct energy weapons destroyed the towers.

Disinformation.



Everyone should notice that almost all of Trebor's points are not supported by the 9/11 truth movement, and therefore are not really "truther" points. Most all of his points are disinformation created to discredit the 9/11 truth movement. And therefore, it's no wonder why he picked all of them.

Many of his points are made-up BS that I've never even heard of before and I've been researching 9/11 for many years.

The best advice I can give to the OP is don't listen to either side. Do your own research and make up your own mind.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
the 9/11 conspiracy people really don't care as to what happened on 9/11.

This is a flat-out dishonest statement. Can you link to a post here or elsewhere that shows where 9/11 conspiracy people don't really care what happened on 9/11? Thanks.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
and they will listen to no information that refutes what they want to believe.

More dishonesty. I've agreed several times with debunkers when they have provided facts that refute a 9/11 theory. Hell, I even closed a thread of mine because a 9/11 theory was refuted by a debunker. I agreed with the debunker's facts and had my thread closed to curtail derailment.

So, you see? Dave isn't being very honest. It's obvious he's being blatantly dishonest to sway opinion. Who are people coming to this thread going to believe? An honest researcher, or someone who's being purposely dishonest to sway someone's opinion?

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
They're here to shove their conspiracy stories down other people's throat and they're so much in love with them that they don't care whether they're even true.

More dishonesty, Dave? I've shown this statement to be false above.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
The self styled truther movement is all but getting into fistfights amongst themselves over what the "blatantly a conspiracy" even is- be it controlled demolitions, nukes in the basement, lasers from outer space, no planes, whatever- so it's obvious they don't care what the conspiracy actually is...just as long as there is one.

This is purposeful and blatant dishonesty. You, and everyone else have been shown numerous times that outlandish theories such as "no planes" and "nukes", space beams, etc., are disinformation and not supported by the 9/11 truth movement. And therefore not being peddled by truthers. And also, therefore, truthers aren't getting into "fistfights over themselves" when the people spreading the above disinformation aren't truthers.

When you keep peddling the above, Dave, and you've been previously shown otherwise on more than one occasion, then that tells me there is an agenda in the works.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
or that Judy Wood isn't claiming the towers weren't brought down by directed energy beams

Oh she's claiming it. But she's not a truther, nor is she or her work supported or acknowledged anywhere in the 9/11 truth movement. Therefore, not a truther claim.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
or that Dylan Avery, et al, isn't claiming the planes that hit the towers were carrying missile pods

No, Dylan Avery is not. You keep referring to the first Loose Change, when there have been four altogether. And that disinfo theory was not included in the last three versions of Loose Change because it's disinformation. You've been told this before also. Therefore, more continued dishonesty coming from you.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
then you are unrepentently lying through your teeth

Now look in the mirror and read what you typed.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
the fact that the truther movement is seriously polluted by hordes of crackpots and con artists doesn't make the fact any less of a fact.

Actually it does. Honest and intelligent people would recognize the crackpots and con artists that are trying to pollute the truth movement and weed them out while doing real research.

Others, like yourself, would rather lump us altogether and discount the whole thing due to a few bad apples. You would rather attack and destroy the whole apple tree instead of weed out the few bad apples. Enough said.

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
The wackier notions expressed in the post may have less currency

What does that level of currency have anything to do with it? An individual person typing his opinion or theory on the internet does not necessarily mean that it automatically becomes a "truther point" or that it's supported by the 9/11 truth movement.

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
in fact there is no evidence to suggest they are put forward by debunkers or people trying to discredit 9/11 'Truth".

Did you look around? There's plenty of evidence and it's been posted many times by myself and others. Just because you either ignored it or missed it, doesn't mean there is none.

I'll give you one link for starters. If you want more, you can do some actual research:

DEW/Energy Weapons? Holograms? TV Fakery? No Planes at the WTC? -- A 9/11 Disinfo Campaign


And on a side note, I have caught debunkers on this very forum using the same exact tactics as no-planers. As far as the molten steel at the WTC is concerned, debunkers have said that the images of molten steel are fake and that the witnesses who saw the molten steel are lying or "mistaken".

What do no-planers say? That the images and videos of the planes are fake and that the witnesses who saw the planes are lying or "mistaken".

So yes, some debunkers are using the same tactics used to poison the 9/11 truth movement with unsupported, crackpot disinfo theories. And because the tactics are eerily identical, there is only one conclusion.

Originally posted by _BoneZ_
What does that level of currency have anything to do with it? An individual person typing his opinion or theory on the internet does not necessarily mean that it automatically becomes a "truther point" or that it's supported by the 9/11 truth movement.

Well, then the level of currency is pretty important.

I know you like to keep clear blue water between you and the crazier ideas in 9/11 "Truth", but the fact remains that large numbers of people who self-identfy as part of the "Truth Movement" believe some things that you find utterly baseless, ridiculous even. Even if some are the product of mischievous elements trying to make the TM look foolish, it is highly unlikely that they all are.

Did you look around? There's plenty of evidence and it's been posted many times by myself and others. Just because you either ignored it or missed it, doesn't mean there is none.

I'll give you one link for starters. If you want more, you can do some actual research:

DEW/Energy Weapons? Holograms? TV Fakery? No Planes at the WTC? -- A 9/11 Disinfo Campaign

I've read that thread. I can't remember any evidence for your and Shadow Herders assertions contained in it.

And on a side note, I have caught debunkers on this very forum using the same exact tactics as no-planers. As far as the molten steel at the WTC is concerned, debunkers have said that the images of molten steel are fake and that the witnesses who saw the molten steel are lying or "mistaken".

What do no-planers say? That the images and videos of the planes are fake and that the witnesses who saw the planes are lying or "mistaken".

So yes, some debunkers are using the same tactics used to poison the 9/11 truth movement with unsupported, crackpot disinfo theories. And because the tactics are eerily identical, there is only one conclusion.

That's a massive stretch. So both sets of people sometimes question witnesses' evidence?

Wow. The MO is spookily similar. They must be one and the same. Just the other day I found out that you breathe air... and noplaners also breathe... you don't have to be a rocket scientist to make the connection.

Look, sorry to be sarcastic, but if that's the extent of your evidence then you're moving beyond parody.

And besides, there is good evidence to show that some of the photos used to "prove" steel were tampered with.

reply to post by Jack Squat


Hi everyone,

To the OP, go to the ATS 9/11 forum list and click on replies so that you get a descending list of all threads listed by amount of replies.

9/11: A Boeing 757 Struck the Pentagon CatHerder 5799
Independent Investigation Into Pentagon Attack Yields Alar... 2804
FLIGHT 93 - The Biggest 911 Smoking Gun! IvanZana 2495
PROOF that Building 7 was demolished with explosives!!! downisreallyup 2284

It looks roughly like this at the top. There is literally more to read than there is time for, I could never go through it all AND understand it. I mean I could read lots of it, but people have different views of what happened, and I'm not gonna claim expertise, and there seems to be a strong body of expert views on all sides of this.

STill, for me and maybe others, do I trust the government? Do I trust the MSM? The start of the Vietnam conflict links in, paramilitary dictators in South America, torture, WMDs, and yet amongst all this 9/11 is supposedily not an inside job.

To the OP and anyone interested quickly check out ...www.amazon.com...=cm_cr_pr_product_top

I've only read the preview pages seems like an interesting read, the history of the CIA and murder, its a touchy subject for some.

Peace out now and forever

Originally posted by _BoneZ_
This is a flat-out dishonest statement. Can you link to a post here or elsewhere that shows where 9/11 conspiracy people don't really care what happened on 9/11? Thanks.

Come on now, I'd have thought you would be the first person to be agreeing with this. More than once I have seen you come down on some conspiracy theorist or another pushing out conspiracy stories which we both agree are pretty goofy (I.E. nukes in the basement, energy weapons from outer space, missile pods, and so on). You've seen for yourself how zealously these people subscribe to these claims, so how can you honestly tell me that the conspiracy people genuinely care about what happened on 9/11 when 99% of them are trying to force the events of 9/11 to conform to whatever their conspiracy laims are?

Someone who insists that the planes were all holograms and every witness claiming they saw a plane is a secret gov't agents is NOT caring about what genuinely happened on 9/11, regardless of whether you happen to agree with it or not. There is no way, shape, or form that anyone standing in Manhattan that day would have seen the attack and thought, "you know, I don't think those planes really exist".

More dishonesty. I've agreed several times with debunkers when they have provided facts that refute a 9/11 theory. Hell, I even closed a thread of mine because a 9/11 theory was refuted by a debunker. I agreed with the debunker's facts and had my thread closed to curtail derailment.

...which is why I said ALMOST all the conspiracy people. In truth, you are the only person I've encountered who a) actually read the 9/11 report, instead of getting some misrepresented cartoon version of it off some damned fool conspiracy web site, and b) doesn't subscribe to a blizzard of other conspiracies, be it the JFK assassination, the moon landing, the USS Liberty, whatever, so you're not basing this on runaway abject paranoia.

If you don't believe anything else I say, believe me when I say you have my compliments in that regard...but you also need to know you are a piddling minority here.

This is purposeful and blatant dishonesty. You, and everyone else have been shown numerous times that outlandish theories such as "no planes" and "nukes", space beams, etc., are disinformation and not supported by the 9/11 truth movement.

Sir, you overlook the rather obvious fact that ALL the "9/11 was staged" conspiracies are disinformation being put out by crackpots and con artists. Personally I think there is a conspiracy, but it's a conspiracy that sheer gov't incompetence allowed the attack to succeed and noone wants to be the one who comes forward and admit he was the one who was napping on 9/11. It's just that my conspiracy isn't as sinister sounding as the "gov't is plotting to murder us all" conspiracies your compatriots are spinning here so noone pays attention to me.

No, Dylan Avery is not. You keep referring to the first Loose Change, when there have been four altogether. And that disinfo theory was not included in the last three versions of Loose Change because it's disinformation. You've been told this before also. Therefore, more continued dishonesty coming from you.

...and yet Dylan Avery still sells it:

Buy Loose Change first edition

Good grief, dude, I could tell you that night is dark and you STILL wouldn't believe it.

reply to post by _BoneZ_


Ya know, _BoneZ_,

it is funny that you kept typing up the word "disinformation" so many times after selecting out each and every claim from trebor451's post....without fully explaining the SOURCES of those "theories"....they are NOT "disinformaiton" in the classic sense (which seems to be your intent??).

They are all valid, and verifiably sourced CLAIMS by various factions within the very "9/11 Truth Movement". A "movement" that in many cases is populated by the most outrageous individuals who actually do believe the most nonsensical "theory" they can create, out of thin air.

This is the nature of such "movements" in general --- they do tend to attract quite a lot of those on the fringes...of reasonability and, yes, of sanity.

Originally posted by trebor451
the airplanes had “forward spraying fuel sprayers” installed to help enhance the explosion of jet fuel;

Disinformation.

Yes, agreed, THAT DID NOT EVER HAPPEN. However, it is undeniable that the idea came from within the fevered imaginations of some "9/11 Truther" somewhere, somewhen....and, once inserted into the vast World Wide Web, it never, ever goes away. Just gets picked up by others who find it "plausible", and then it's "Katie Bar The Door!".


But, I see a very, very subtle attempt here....think no one would notice?

Originally posted by trebor451
there were NO AIRPLANES AT ALL;

As far as the WTC is concerned: disinformation.

Not very cricket!


Well, on and on, more of the "disinformaiton" label, and again: Those ARE totally unwarranted opinions, but they come from within the "movement" itself. There are a great many discordant voices competing for 'attention'....

Originally posted by trebor451
it was a Global Hawk;

Disinformation.

Etc..

OK...the ONE thing that at least you get correct is your revulsion and rejection of the "NPT" people's rabidly inane ideas...

Originally posted by trebor451
it was a painted-up KC-135 Tanker aircraft;

As far as the WTC is concerned, disinformation. One can verify that the second plane that hit was a 767-200 with minimal research.

That one encompasses ALL of the other 'claims' enumerated by trebor451, as he organized all of the various "Truther theories" in his post, that center on "No Planes". To include the ridiculous notion that they were "military" or "remote controlled"...which you, contradictorily, called as 'possible'...

Nope. Not even 'plausible', because as you noted just above, the identities of AAL 11 and UAL 175 as stock passenger-version Boeing 767-200s can be verified with minimal research.

Just as the AAL 77 and UAL 93 can be easily proven to be normal passenger Boeing 757-200s.

Major difference between all of those airplanes were merely the engine types installed. (United airlines is a long-time user of P&W powerplants. American chose the GEs for the 767s, and the RollsRoyce for the 757. I'll wager that the majority of "9/11 Truth Investigators" don't know/can't be bothered to learn such details, nor would they recognize their significances).


Now...this one is part of the reason I joined ATS in the first place...remember WHO used to expound on this "theory"?:

Originally posted by trebor451
it was done with holograms;

Disinformation.

In case you've forgotten, that was John Lear. Did he stick to that "story" intentionally, as part of some 'disinfo' campaign?!?

You see, it is contradictory, since HE is cited so frequently, with such reverence, by the "PilotsFor9/11Truth" people (well, that one guy who is running the whole operation, anyway...) Are they, too, part of this so-called "disinfo"?? Because, if so --- they sure aren't playing the game that way; they seem completely (if incorrectly, they try to stick to their guns) convinced of the junk they "publish".

Oh, ho! Another John Lear-ism: (It ties in with the "holograms", dunnit?)

Originally posted by trebor451
pre-set charges blew the holes in the WTC to LOOK like an airplane hit;

Disinformation.

And, another, JL's biggie:

Originally posted by trebor451
a particle beam is what brought the towers down;

Disinformation.

Now....here's where YOU -- yes, you, are engaging in a bit of "disinfo' yourself...do you even realize it, as you do it?:

Originally posted by trebor451
the passengers never existed;

It's possible. Read the "Operation Northwoods" documents.

"Operation Northwoods", and 9/11, have no 'possible' connections whatsoever. Not even close.... :sad:

More dissembling, and disinfo, and contradiction, from 'BoneZ':

Originally posted by trebor451
It wasn't thermate, it was nano-thermate;

Also possible as lab tests on the WTC dust have preliminarily shown.

Alex Jones' so-called "lab tests"? Hardly, as shown many times, his "paper" is worthless.


But, but, but....there is Zero, Nada, Nil, No evidence at all for:

Originally posted by trebor451
controlled demolition is what brought the towers down;

Absolutely, without a doubt.

THAT is 'disinformation'.



[edit on 6 July 2010 by weedwhacker]

reply to post by GoodOlDave


"satan worshipping numerologists"

Haha havnt heard that one before, but "snip" funny. As to the OP type in google "screw loose change" its a pretty good site with some links.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

How can you even discuss the facts rationally with people who subscribe to fantasia?

You gave me a good laugh with that comment Dave, considering your without question the most qualified person to answer that question. You could probably write a book about how to do this very thing. I'll never understand why the whole Debunker crowd likes to play ball with the very people they despise and think are totally and completely out of there minds, in the land of Fantasia(as you put it).

The only logical conclusion is that the core Debunker movements mission has nothing to do with arguing with Truthers at all but is aimed at all of the fence riders reading the back and forth. The goal is/was to change public opinion about Truthers and affirm the official CT. The newly anointed Debunkers probably have no clue and just want to hang with the popular guys, but no doubt the people who started the whole organized debunking knew exactly what they were doing.



To the OP, I have to agree with what one of the above posters already said, that is that you seem to be going about this the wrong way. I agree, and think if you really want to have a clue you have to first read all of the official reports. There are so many aspects to 9/11, three crime scenes, you have lots of reports for each crime scene, on top of the commissions report.

Going off of some list of Truther theories won't help(especially if you get them from Debunkers like Trebor, who knows that hardly anyone subscribes to almost every theory he listed).

Originally posted by weedwhacker

They are all valid, and verifiably sourced CLAIMS by various factions within the very "9/11 Truth Movement". A "movement" that in many cases is populated by the most outrageous individuals who actually do believe the most nonsensical "theory" they can create, out of thin air.

And of course the really sad part is that truthers like Bonez don't realize that anyone that can help get a new investigation think the same way as he about ALL the demo theories that he considers probable with the same conviction that he dismisses the nukes, hologram, dew, etc.

IOW, dead end Bonez.

Now go make your mockumentary. I could use a good laugh...

Originally posted by Skeptron
"satan worshipping numerologists"

Haha havnt heard that one before, but "snip" funny. As to the OP type in google "screw loose change" its a pretty good site with some links.

Yep, according to the conspiracy people, there's supposedly some secret world wide cult called the Illuminati infiltrating everything from the gov't to the Red Hat society who worship Satan/Lucifer/whatever and hard core big on numerology. You can tell when a conspiracy theorist is playing this card when they start bringing up weird references like Bilderberg, obscure mathematical calculations, and how the WTC looked like a giant number eleven. When I first encountered this type on another site I thought he was just one individual crackpot, but I've since seen a bunch more of them here.

These conspiracy people always complain that noone is listening to them. They need to be careful of what they wish for.

Originally posted by PersonalChoice
You gave me a good laugh with that comment Dave, considering your without question the most qualified person to answer that question. You could probably write a book about how to do this very thing. I'll never understand why the whole Debunker crowd likes to play ball with the very people they despise and think are totally and completely out of there minds, in the land of Fantasia(as you put it).

On the contrary, I have said many times that I do NOT believe you're all raving lunatics. There are a few crackpots in your ranks (like that guy pushing the "shapeshifting alien lizards" stories) but most of you are otherwise intelligent, thoughtful, and articulate people. The problem is that you're getting all your information from those damned fool conspiracy web sites being run by outright con artists, Dylan Avery and his peddling everything from DVDs to books to T-shirts to baseball caps is a sterling case in point. I can see right away that the conspiracy proponents are all quoting the exact same false information almost word for word (I.E. the military stand down order, Bush's relative being in charge of WTC security, all the NYPA bomb dogs being withdrawn, etc) that all this garbage has to be coming from somewhere.

I'm not here to insult you or to make you feel bad. You're simply the victim in their con.

Going off of some list of Truther theories won't help(especially if you get them from Debunkers like Trebor, who knows that hardly anyone subscribes to almost every theory he listed).

Every time I see someone posting a disclaimer like this, a day doesn't go by before someone comes out of the woodwork and starts posting those very claims. They're definitely out there, they're simply listening to different conspiracy web sites than you are.

[edit on 7-7-2010 by GoodOlDave]

reply to post by GoodOlDave


Quite so. You only have to read some of the No Plane threads, or the nonsense about Space Beams, to realise that these people are deadly serious. Can they all really be employees of the CIA? I doubt it.

Thanks to everyone who has given some input in this thread. I clearly have a LOT of reading to do.

reply to post by weedwhacker

Alex Jones' so-called "lab tests"? Hardly, as shown many times, his "paper" is worthless.


But, but, but....there is Zero, Nada, Nil, No evidence at all for:

A quick heads up Weed! It was Dr. Steven Jones who was pushing that pathetic excuse of a lab test as "evidence" of magic nanothermite/ate. Not Alex Jones. But I can see the reasoning behind the mix up!

reply to post by GenRadek


You are so right! Since there is never anything "new" here, as the OP mentions....it is just the same old, and it tends to blend together....fast fingers, betray me!!

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/bd2c6f45dfae.jpg[/atsimg]

The fact is that the 9/11 Truthers have MORE evidence to back their "claims" then the debunkers. Even the 9/11 Commissioners complained about the cover-up.

Originally posted by Jack Squat
...I was wondering if there is a website, or even an ATS thread that has a simple and accessible list of the points "Truthers" typically bring up, as well as the rebuttles for those points.

1. Claim - There are No pilots at pilotsfor911truth.org

pilotsfor911truth.org...

All above names who are pilots certified by the FAA can be cross referenced here...
amsrvs.registry.faa.gov...

Pilots Question 9/11 (photos here)
patriotsquestion911.com...




2. Claim - The FDR Data stops/is missing 2-6 seconds of data west of the pentagon wall

FDR Recorders built to .5 sec lag maximum standard
pilotsfor911truth.org...=7152

Radar Altitude Confirms too high
pilotsfor911truth.org...=4801

NTSB plots aircraft 1 second away from pentagon wall.
i47.photobucket.com...
i47.photobucket.com...

American 77 Flight Recorder Position Data - DME Video
pilotsfor911truth.org...=10751

Lat/Long/DME
pilotsfor911truth.org...&p=8305238

Putting Fdr "delay" Myth To Rest
pilotsfor911truth.org...=13846

INS vs DME
pilotsfor911truth.org...=15047

Added Oct 2009 - Newly Decoded Data Not Verified, Conflicts with NTSB Flight Path Study, and still shows too high to hit the Pentagon.
pilotsfor911truth.org...


2a. Claim - The data file terminates at a point west of the Pentagon based on altitude correlation of the MC values recorded by the PLA and IAD radar facilities and the full set of DME data matched to the various VOR's used along the flight path.

FDR Positional/DME Data obtained from a file (RO2) which was decoded by software not intended for use with Aircraft Accident Investigation. Above claim ignores this point. Pilots For 9/11 Truth have not used RO2 for any official analysis published on our main site due to this point alone. Although, we have shown Radar Altitude from RO2 in conjunction with claims made still place the aircraft too high. See claim 3.

Above Radar data processed by a person with an extreme bias for the govt story, has made numerous math errors in the past regarding simple vector analysis and has been shown to be in error of their radar analysis. Above claimant does not know the difference between pressure and true altitude and has admitted a "large potential for human error" in his Radar plot/analysis. When invited for debate by a 3rd party moderator on above claim(s), P4T accepted, claimant refused.

"In general, the final AA77 data in the raw [radar] file differs materially from the processed file."
pilotsfor911truth.org...&p=107 65222

"aa77" Final Approach Ground Speed Determination From The 84rades Radar Data, 84Rades and FDR data mutually INCONSISTENT?
pilotsfor911truth.org...=15913

Altitude Correlation determined above based on primary RADES radar returns. NTSB states. "... the altitude estimates from these returns are subject to potentially large errors" when attempting to correlate primary RADES altitude data for Egypt Air 990.

Points within the RADES Data have the alleged AA77 in excess of 50,000 feet.
pilotsfor911truth.org...=13211

RADES Altitude Data is not reliable for correlating position.

Altitude Data impossible to correlate due to inoperative Mode C.

Nav 1 DME recorded 1.5 NM off DCA VOR. The above claim ignores this point.
American 77 Flight Recorder Position Data - DME Video
pilotsfor911truth.org...=10751

DME Slant Range errors are ignored by above claim.

Repetitive DME returns in excess of regulation intervals in RO2 ignored by above claim.

INS Errors are ignored by above claim (AA77 RO2 positional data shows aircraft departing roughly 3,000 feet south of IAD Runway 30. Illustration - www.aa77fdr.com...)

INS vs DME
pilotsfor911truth.org...=15047

See Claim 2 for more information on "missing seconds".


3. Claim - There is altimeter lag in the animation and csv file due to flying outside the aircraft envelope.

Airdata Calibration and Measurement
pilotsfor911truth.org...

FDR Vertical Speed - Altimeter lag issues Addressed
pilotsfor911truth.org...

Radar Altitude Confirms too High
pilotsfor911truth.org...=4801

Reserved - more info forthcoming



4. Claim - The Information that P4T has analyzed may not be from the NTSB (P4T may have fabricated the information and claims it came from the NTSB)

csv file download and cover letters provided by Undertow
pilotsfor911truth.org...

Raw data decode provided by Undertow
pilotsfor911truth.org...=4574

Animation cover letters/envelope provided by Snowgrouch
pilotsfor911truth.org...

Animation cover letters provided by Mick Harrison
pilotsfor911truth.org...=6205

Reserved - More forthcoming

Animation provided by Third party on google video
video.google.com...[/ur l]

George Washington University NTSB Data
[url="http://www.gwu.edu/%7Ensarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB196/index.htm"]http://www.gwu.edu/%7Ensarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB196/index.htm

NTSB FOIA Website
www.ntsb.gov...

NTSB FOIA Contact - Melba D. Moye
202-314-6000

NTSB FOIA Request form -
www.ntsb.gov...



5. Claim - The csv file and animation show a heading along the official flight path.

csv file heading does not line up perfectly with physical damage
i47.photobucket.com...
American 77 Flight Path in 3D
pilotsfor911truth.org...=8166

csv file was altered to show southern approach
pilotsfor911truth.org...=5083

ThePentaCon
thepentacon.com...



6. Claim - Pilots For 9/11 Truth has not provided all the data

We have provided all data which pertains to all published research and analysis that is not proprietary in nature. All information/data can be found on links above. The only information we cannot and do not provide is a proprietary Data Frame Layout which does not change our analysis in any way. Undertow can expand on this more when he sees this post.




7. Claim - Cover Letter Dated March 22, 2007 says Animation not "Official" that its a "working copy"

Animation cover letter provided by Mick Harrison
pilotsfor911truth.org...=6205

Animation isnt the only information we have. We also have a Raw file and csv file (see above).

However, the cover letter states the animation "was not used for official purpose" which means it was never used in an investigation. It is an official copy since it was officially provided through the Freedom Of Information Act and from the NTSB. The NTSB notes in the cover letter that they want everything as accurate as possible when providing information through the FOIA, however they note one error which was made to the clock annotation. They do not account for any other possible errors regarding the animation in this cover letter.

Given the fact that all we really need is the last data point - we offer the following article.
FDR Recorders built to .5 sec lag maximum standard
pilotsfor911truth.org...=7152

8. Claim -
The Flight Data Recorder was found in the Pentagon. How can it be too high?

pilotsfor911truth.org...=7322

Can the Govt Get Their Story Straight? - Location of FDR
pilotsfor911truth.org...

Lies, Conflicting Reports, Cover-Up's
Location of American 77 Flight Data Recorder - Part II
pilotsfor911truth.org...