It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

So who the heck ever said "Pull it" was slang for controlled demolitions?

page: 31
17
<< 28  29  30    32  33  34 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 10:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK

Yeah its a damned fool conspiracy site, but if that is true then that opens a whole new kettle of fish wouldn't you say? Larry was either lying or he wasn't speaking to who he thought he was?

The plot sickens.


So if Larry was lying about talking to the NYFD then why would he have been telling the truth when he said "pull it"? If one part of the statement cannot be held at face value then none of his statement can be held at face value.

Personally I think the NYFD didn't ask him what he wanted them to do with the building, but instead the NYFD TOLD him they were abandoning the attempt to rescue the building, and he simply embellished his own importance in the decision to make himself look good. Of course, the truthers will NEVER accept this as being possible because even though Silverstein was caught at a lie, the lie does nothing to help embellish their own conspiracy stories and they don't want to give up their "Silverstein said 'pull it"" games.

Please point out why anything I just said is incorrect.
edit on 26-3-2012 by GoodOlDave because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 10:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by longjohnbritches

Ok thed let's do it your way
Below is info you posted for members consumption.

True or false?????


"Also reports of the extent of the damage reached the FDNY incident commanders who made decision to
abandon WTC 7 as being too dangerous this was shortly after noon (12PM) "

thanks ljb



What were they abandoning at noon?? The firefighting! The collapse zone was established at approx. 4pm. to clear everyone away. The search and recovery was abandoned at that time.


It had very heavy fire on many floors and I ordered the evacuation of an area sufficient around to protect our members, so we had to give up some rescue operations that were going on at the time and back the people away far enough so that if 7 World Trade did collapse, we [wouldn't] lose any more people. We continued to operate on what we could from that distance and approximately an hour and a half after that order was [given], at 5:30 in the afternoon, World Trade Center collapsed completely" - Daniel Nigro, Chief of Department

www.nytimes.com...


edit on 26-3-2012 by Six Sigma because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 10:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by GenRadek
reply to post by Six Sigma
 


Just like the BS about basement bombs, nukes and such, and yet, people survived in the core's stairwells. How can that be possible if the core columns were suppose to be blown up at the base?


You already know what the ready made answer will be. It's the same answer they use to brush off all the other evidence that shows their conspiracies are rubbish- they're all sinister secret agents.

Once someone boards that runaway train of conspiracies within coverups within secret plots, it's nigh impossible to get off.



posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 10:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by longjohnbritches
Yes I do. Would you like to lay it out for us?
Say in terms of PROBABILITY.


All intelligent people know that the "odds" of something happen have absolutely nothing to do with reality. Now, if a scenario repeated itself almost exactly a million times, then you might see odds working out, but in the real world, even if there's a 1/1000000000 chance of something happening, it can happen.



posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 11:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Six Sigma

Originally posted by longjohnbritches


Yes I do. Would you like to lay it out for us?
Say in terms of PROBABILITY.


Look up:

John McLoughlin
en.wikipedia.org...

Will Jimeno
en.wikipedia.org...

Both were trapped in an elevator shaft on 9/11. Why is it that truthers rely on debunkers to learn the truth? (then handwave it away)


No thank you.
Stay focused now.
Can you count to 3,000?
Well then you can figure the laws of probability of the entire body of the grandpa firman being found in that tower.
Come on sir SHOW us your math.
BTW what was found of John O Niel?



posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 11:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Varemia

Originally posted by longjohnbritches
Yes I do. Would you like to lay it out for us?
Say in terms of PROBABILITY.


All intelligent people know that the "odds" of something happen have absolutely nothing to do with reality. Now, if a scenario repeated itself almost exactly a million times, then you might see odds working out, but in the real world, even if there's a 1/1000000000 chance of something happening, it can happen.


So you can do the math?
wonderful.
Now focus and stay on topic.
What are the actual numbers for the odds of finding that one grandaddy fireman?
Not just his dna or a phone, IT's his entire body, nothing missing NOTHING.
In the bottom of one of the twins on September the 11 2001 by 3pm
By three PM
edit on 26-3-2012 by longjohnbritches because: time and date



posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 11:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by longjohnbritches
So you can do the math?
wonderful.
Now focus and stay on topic.
What are the actual numbers for the odds of finding that one grandaddy fireman?
Not just his dna or a phone, IT's his entire body, nothing missing NOTHING.


Ah yes, here comes the garbage statistics from people who know absolutely nothing about statistics. Whether or not people survived depended entirely on where they were in the building when they collapsed, not on statistics. People in the lower levels were able to survive while people above the impact area didn't survive at all.

Let's face it, if you need to resort to arguing over the odds of some given victim's remains being recovered intact, this ISN'T really out of wanting to research the events of 9/11. It's just grasping at straws out of desperation to keep your conspiracy theories alive. Why not argue over what color shoelaces the guy was wearing when he died, while you're at it.

FYI since they actually did find his remains, the probability would be 100%.
edit on 26-3-2012 by GoodOlDave because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 12:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by longjohnbritches
So you can do the math?
wonderful.
Now focus and stay on topic.
What are the actual numbers for the odds of finding that one grandaddy fireman?
Not just his dna or a phone, IT's his entire body, nothing missing NOTHING.


Ah yes, here comes the garbage statistics from people who know absolutely nothing about statistics. Whether or not people survived depended entirely on where they were in the building when they collapsed, not on statistics. People in the lower levels were able to survive while people above the impact area didn't survive at all.

Let's face it, if you need to resort to arguing over the odds of some given victim's remains being recovered intact, this ISN'T really out of wanting to research the events of 9/11. It's just grasping at straws out of desperation to keep your conspiracy theories alive. Why not argue over what color shoelaces the guy was wearing when he died, while you're at it.

FYI since they actually did find his remains, the probability would be 100%.
edit on 26-3-2012 by GoodOlDave because: (no reason given)

Hi again Dave,
Nice try with that post but it doesn't answer the question.
So how many OSer does it take to answer a simple math question honestly?



posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 12:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by longjohnbritches


No thank you.
Stay focused now.
Can you count to 3,000?
Well then you can figure the laws of probability of the entire body of the grandpa firman being found in that tower.
Come on sir SHOW us your math.
BTW what was found of John O Niel?


Hey, SNIP you fail at 9/11. It's been over 10 years and you haven't a CLUE as to any facts. John O' Neil's remains were found on 9/21/01.

And "Grandapa Fireman" was only 54 and killed prior to becoming a grandfather.

Why don't you figure out the math. I suck at it.
edit on 26-3-2012 by Crakeur because: snipped unnecessary personal attack



posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 12:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Six Sigma

Originally posted by longjohnbritches

Ok thed let's do it your way
Below is info you posted for members consumption.

True or false?????


"Also reports of the extent of the damage reached the FDNY incident commanders who made decision to
abandon WTC 7 as being too dangerous this was shortly after noon (12PM) "

thanks ljb



What were they abandoning at noon?? The firefighting! The collapse zone was established at approx. 4pm. to clear everyone away. The search and recovery was abandoned at that time.


It had very heavy fire on many floors and I ordered the evacuation of an area sufficient around to protect our members, so we had to give up some rescue operations that were going on at the time and back the people away far enough so that if 7 World Trade did collapse, we [wouldn't] lose any more people. We continued to operate on what we could from that distance and approximately an hour and a half after that order was [given], at 5:30 in the afternoon, World Trade Center collapsed completely" - Daniel Nigro, Chief of Department

www.nytimes.com...


edit on 26-3-2012 by Six Sigma because: (no reason given)


Switch and bait don't work with me sir.
The original comment was posted by another member.
Don't you read well?
You can answer the question if you want but focus focus
The question deserves the true or false answer my post asks for.
Now back up, get it CORRECT.
Or simply let the poster that my post is addresed to answer.
thakya thaya very much.



posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 12:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by longjohnbritches


So you can do the math?
wonderful.
Now focus and stay on topic.
What are the actual numbers for the odds of finding that one grandaddy fireman?
Not just his dna or a phone, IT's his entire body, nothing missing NOTHING.
In the bottom of one of the twins on September the 11 2001 by 3pm


Since I am bored, I'll help the clueless truther:

How many people died at the WTC on 9/11? Do you know?

Including the hijackers I believe the number to be around 2,752.

How many intact bodies were recovered? 293

Can you calculate the percentage of these two numbers, truther?

Come on!



posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 12:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Six Sigma
 


I'll get back to you after I talk with a moderator or sombody.



posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 12:45 PM
link   
reply to post by longjohnbritches
 


Okay, truther! Hopefully they will have a calculator to help you out with the difficult math equation.

I also read back with your questions to Thedman. I'd like to answer what I can for you, since you are having trouble researching things that have been discussed for many years:


1 Could you put an exact time frame on Larry's statement in the OP where he says we made a decision to pull it and we watched the building fall?


Easiest one: The answer is never. "we" was not part of the quote. L.S. clearly stated that "THEY" made the decision. If you would like to concede the fact that he said "they"...then you would have to ask L.S. yourself. He does not state the time in his interview.


2 Can you confirm that a decision to abandon was made at 12pm?


Yes, I believe that firefighting efforts were abandoned at that time.


3 Why are times left out where you quote firemen saying
"We were heading for 7 and just around FREAKIN BLANK we were a hundered yards away." WTF


Firefighters didn't have the option to look up and see Big Ben. Perhaps you can contact them?

4: (i never researched that, not interested)


5 Do you confirn that the terminology at 3pm was prepare for a collaps zone?


I confirmed that for you in an above post.


6 Do you confirm that at 3pm a fire man said THEY THOUGHT 7 was going to collapse?


I believe by then, it was one of their fears.


7 and at 3pm was that the time the firemen got every one in a pile and the main concern was to get every one out?


Can you restructure this a little better? I am not sure what you are talking about.


8 Do you confirm that not once in all the NYCFD speak is there even the SLIGHTEST mention of PULL IT.


Pull "it" ... i haven't seen it. "Pull" the operation was mentioned many times that afternoon. I created a post on a previous page detailing this.



posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 12:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by longjohnbritches
Hi again Dave,
Nice try with that post but it doesn't answer the question.
So how many OSer does it take to answer a simple math question honestly?


No, actually I did answer it. You asked what the probability was of something that happened. Statistics say that when something actually happened, and now that you know it happened, the probability of it happening becomes 100%. It's the same argument of the probability of calling heads or tails correctly on a coin before you toss it being 50%. After you toss it, your call is either 100% correct or 100% incorrect. This is because the population being polled has changed during the coin toss- before the coin toss, you had two probabilities. After the coin toss, you only have one.

Now how about addressing my statement- unless you're being hard core desperate here and you're attempting to drop innuendo that the guy's remains were planted and/or staged, why is this relevent to anything?
edit on 26-3-2012 by GoodOlDave because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 01:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Six Sigma
reply to post by longjohnbritches
 


Okay, truther! Hopefully they will have a calculator to help you out with the difficult math equation.

I also read back with your questions to Thedman. I'd like to answer what I can for you, since you are having trouble researching things that have been discussed for many years:


1 Could you put an exact time frame on Larry's statement in the OP where he says we made a decision to pull it and we watched the building fall?


Easiest one: The answer is never. "we" was not part of the quote. L.S. clearly stated that "THEY" made the decision. If you would like to concede the fact that he said "they"...then you would have to ask L.S. yourself. He does not state the time in his interview.


2 Can you confirm that a decision to abandon was made at 12pm?


Yes, I believe that firefighting efforts were abandoned at that time.


3 Why are times left out where you quote firemen saying
"We were heading for 7 and just around FREAKIN BLANK we were a hundered yards away." WTF


Firefighters didn't have the option to look up and see Big Ben. Perhaps you can contact them?

4: (i never researched that, not interested)


5 Do you confirn that the terminology at 3pm was prepare for a collaps zone?


I confirmed that for you in an above post.


6 Do you confirm that at 3pm a fire man said THEY THOUGHT 7 was going to collapse?


I believe by then, it was one of their fears.


7 and at 3pm was that the time the firemen got every one in a pile and the main concern was to get every one out?


Can you restructure this a little better? I am not sure what you are talking about.


8 Do you confirm that not once in all the NYCFD speak is there even the SLIGHTEST mention of PULL IT.


Pull "it" ... i haven't seen it. "Pull" the operation was mentioned many times that afternoon. I created a post on a previous page detailing this.

Hi SNIP
Save your breath (fingers)I am not interested in your tripe spin.
Your colors are flyin high.
I'll wait for thed or remind him later.




posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 01:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by longjohnbritches
Hi again Dave,
Nice try with that post but it doesn't answer the question.
So how many OSer does it take to answer a simple math question honestly?


No, actually I did answer it. You asked what the probability was of something that happened. Statistics say that when something actually happened, and now that you know it happened, the probability of it happening becomes 100%. It's the same argument of the probability of calling heads or tails correctly on a coin before you toss it being 50%. After you toss it, your call is either 100% correct or 100% incorrect. This is because the population being polled has changed during the coin toss- before the coin toss, you had two probabilities. After the coin toss, you only have one.

Now how about addressing my statement- unless you're being hard core desperate here and you're attempting to drop innuendo that the guy's remains were planted and/or staged, why is this relevent to anything?
edit on 26-3-2012 by GoodOlDave because: (no reason given)


Hi dave
Well the math guys here said I should do the math for you. (actually they will do it)
Then I will add that to the probability of John O Niel's body being found also.
Might take me a little longer than you guys can do it but I am sure this way it will get done. This is just a tid bit of stuff I got for youse guys.
later buddy



posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 01:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by longjohnbritches
Hi dave
Well the math guys here said I should do the math for you. (actually they will do it)
Then I will add that to the probability of John O Niel's body being found also.
Might take me a little longer than you guys can do it but I am sure this way it will get done. This is just a tid bit of stuff I got for youse guys.
later buddy


That is not an answer. I ASKED why this is relevent to anything, because as of right now you're giving the appearance that you're attempting to drop the innuendo that their bodies were planted by secret agents as part of this grandiose conspiracy and/or coverup. I'm giving you the opportunity to address this before I question just how sick in the head would someone have to be to even come up with such a ghoulish claim.



posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 02:01 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


Answering a question with a question is spin 101
Here are the statistics for members that want to do thier own math.
thanks for the dance sorry I dropped you on your nogin.
But it is time to move on. Do you want thed's unanswered question?

Background Attack Aftermath Evidence Misinformation Analysis Memorial
9 - 1 1 R e s e a r c h
.com
.wtc7.net




V 1.38
Copyright 2003-2011,
911Research.WTC7.net site last updated:9/25/11
fair use notice


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Background Attack Aftermath Evidence Misinformation Analysis Memorial




Missing Bodies
More Than 1000 Bodies Are Unaccounted for
The number of people believed to have been killed in the World Trade Center attack hovers around 2,780, three years after the attack. 1 2 No trace has been identified for about half the victims, despite the use of advanced DNA techniques to identify individuals. Six weeks after the attack only 425 people had been identified. 3 A year after the attack, only half of the victims had been identified. 19,906 remains were recovered from Ground Zero, 4,735 of which were identified. Up to 200 remains were linked to a single person. 4 Of the 1,401 people identified, 673 of the IDs were based on DNA alone. Only 293 intact bodies were found. Only twelve could be identified by sight. 5


New York City Medical Examiner Charles Hirsch had the difficult job of informing the friends and families of the victims that the remains of their loved ones might never be identified. The forensic investigation ended in early 2005, when the medical examiner's office stated it had exhaused efforts to identify the missing. The victim identification statistics reported in a February 23, 2005 AP article, listed in the following table, remained about the same as those reported in articles published a year after the attack. 6

nearly 2,800 victims
fewer than 300 whole bodies found
fewer than 1,600 victims identified
over 1,100 victims remain unidentified
over 800 victims identified by DNA alone
nearly 20,000 pieces of bodies found
over 6,000 pieces small enough to fit in test-tubes
over 200 pieces matched to single person
nearly 10,000 unidentified pieces frozen for future analysis


edit on 26-3-2012 by longjohnbritches because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 02:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by longjohnbritches
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


Answering a question is spin 101
Here are the statistics for members that want to make up thier own math.
thanks for the dance sorry I dropped you on your nogin.
But it is time to move on. Do you want thed's unanswered question?


How the heck is it "time to move on" when there's still a question you haven't answered- WHY is this relevent to anything?

You're the one who's making much ado about this topic, not Thed or anyone else.



posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 02:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by longjohnbritches
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


Answering a question is spin 101
Here are the statistics for members that want to make up thier own math.
thanks for the dance sorry I dropped you on your nogin.
But it is time to move on. Do you want thed's unanswered question?


How the heck is it "time to move on" when there's still a question you haven't answered- WHY is this relevent to anything?

You're the one who's making much ado about this topic, not Thed or anyone else.


Oh NOT.
I have just been tip toeing along with you guys and your spin.
Do you realize I have owned you dudes since 2:12 AM
And all by my lonesome.
I am as off topic as I go with you tango dancers.
I asked a question of thed. I will have to go back and look for it I guess.
This might take a long while so carry on



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 28  29  30    32  33  34 >>

log in

join