Rule
Posts: 10479
Joined: 12/5/2005
Status: offline
|
The below quotes are some tidbits from this webpage.
quote:
There was a bomb scare at the FAA's Boston Air Traffic Center, as well as a false alarm about an approaching suicide plane that prompted the evacuation of the building.[3] An evacuation also occurred at another FAA facility on Martha's Vineyard when a large white plane was sighted near the tower. [4] Unfortunately, this low-flying plane was never identified.
Air traffic centers that keep an eye on everything that moves in the sky were evacuated during the minutes that funny things happened in the sky. Weird, isn't that weird?
quote:
the FAA tracked Flight 11 continuously until just north of the World Trade Center, when the plane dropped below 2,000 feet and was lost to radar.
Yep, lost to radar. This plane, allegedly Flight 11, disappeared without anyone ever having been able to identify it.
quote:
FAA controllers who were afraid that NORAD's "fast-moving fighters" might collide with commercial passenger planes, hundreds of which were "in the area, still flying normal routes."
I do not doubt that MusicBoredom as well as the father of the person whom I spoke on the train saw an airplane. But I know that Flight 11 never took off. Whereas there were hundreds of other commercial passenger planes in the area. My point is that the eye-witnesses cannot testify that they saw Flight 11. It might have been any of the hundreds of other planes that were in the area that they saw.
My biggest problem is not that they saw a plane. I know that there was at least one other commercial passenger plane that exhibited highly suspicious behavior - and there may have been another one that I am not aware off.
My biggest problem is that they say that they saw the plane fly into the second tower. But I know that neither tower was hit by a plane, for one of the two planes never took off and the other one landed safely elsewhere. The solution to this paradox, in my opinion, must lie in the interpretation of what the eye-witnesses saw.
quote:
Lower Manhattan is not a flight corridor for commercial air traffic, nor was it on September 11. Three international airports service greater New York City. Two of them, JFK and La Guardia, are well to the east of Manhattan, and the third, Newark Airport, is located in New Jersey, west across the Hudson. None of the flight corridors or holding patterns for these busy airports intersect the borough of Manhattan at any point.
quote:
Soon after the attack, 9/11 truth investigators discovered that someone had scrubbed the DCANG web page from the internet, along with its mission statement about "providing combat units in the highest possible state of readiness."[43] Luckily, however, several months before the attack someone archived the page, which can still be viewed on line
Weird.
quote:
Although the FAA's Boston Center tracked Flight 11 continuously on radar, for some reason NEADS was unable to locate the hijacked plane. Scoggins told me he gave them "nav aids," which are commonly used reference points, and even precise latitude and longitude coordinates, but to no avail. Lt. Col Dawne Deskins, who was on the receiving end of his call, told FOX News exactly what Scoggins told me: "He [Scoggins] gave me the latitude and longitude of that track...but there was nothing there."[45] At the time, Flight 11 was moving at 600 mph and should have been conspicuous on radar, according to Scoggins. But NEADS never did find the plane. This strange lapse haunts Scoggins to this day, because it never should have happened.
Independent corroboration that Flight 11 never existed.
Hm, I can move a non-existent airplane moving at 600 mph; that is easy.
Therefore, MusicBoredom, I do not doubt your sincerity. I do not doubt that you saw an airplane. What I do doubt is that you saw an airplane fly into one of the towers. It would help if you could testify that another eye-witness was standing next to you and called out: "Hey, MusicBoredom, did you see that? That plane flew into that tower." Or was it that you were listening to the radio and the guy talking on the radio said "Another plane just flew into the second tower," and you concluded 'Oh, so that was what I saw'? Think back, MusicBoredom, is there even the slightest chance that you were tricked by a master magician? Were mirrors or other deceptions used? (I am not serious about the mirrors.)
Look here, let's say that the tower has a diameter of one hundred meters and that the plane has equal length. It is moving at 600 mph, that is (600 x 16100)/3600 = 2680 meters per second. So it would have passed the diameter of the tower within 0.04 seconds. That is about ten times longer than the human visual response time, I guess, but nevertheless I do think that when an object is moving that fast, that the eye and mind might be fooled far more easily than if the object moved at a slower speed.
|
RE: How to handle "rule" and other trolls - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread