It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The 9/11 Time Discrepancy Oddity: Distress Signals Indicated Planes Crashed Minutes BEFORE Flights 1

page: 3
<< 1  2   >>

log in


posted on Sep, 25 2010 @ 06:47 AM

Originally posted by thedman
All you have is some unknown person on the internet making claims ....

If you READ the article (theres that reading comprehension thing) notice that US Air pilot reporting them did not say were from American 11/United 175 . All said is got brief ELT signals in NYC area that morning

Also notice that ELT are often triggered by accident either in air on the ground by rough handling

Airspace arounf Manhattan is one of the most crowded in the world - plently of candidates for accident trips

As for not being activated by crash - considering the violence of the impact = hitting skyscraper at 500 mph
were more than likely destroyed on impact

You are making illogical leap - a common fallacy of Truther types

What is it with you guys. Why can't you discuss something based on the facts, instead of simply saying anything at all, true or false, solely to discredit the post and the member posting it.



Oh no, of course, some people aren 't interested in the facts, but they must have some reason for spreading disinfo, I wonder what this is.

posted on Sep, 25 2010 @ 12:27 PM
reply to post by wcitizen

I take it you are not a pilot? Because, if you were, then you would understand better.

In fact, the "bibliography", as you cry, DOES refute the entire "blog"s point!

The person who wrote the "blog" (incorrectly) assumed that airliners have ELTs....based on his/her poor understanding of what he is reading. He/she cites proper sources, but DOES NOT COMPREHEND them!

This is, so common among laypeople, especially in the field of aviation, and all of its arcane (to the uninitiated) jargon and terminology, and complex interlacing.

I am sorry, but your OP (based on a person's "blog") is rife with misunderstandings and misconceptions, because of what I have outlined just above, and in previous posts.

new topics
<< 1  2   >>

log in