Saturday, October 08, 2011

9-11-11 Part II

JREFer 9-11 Kongen with Gary Talis, Jason Bermas, Dylan Avery and Luke Rudkowski:

105 Comments:

At 08 October, 2011 14:17, Blogger Theo said...

Can someone explain what Bermas is talking about concerning the 8 mile debris field? I always thought this matter had be resolved ages ago. Was there debris of flight 93 8 miles away or not? Wasn't this a simple calculation error?

 
At 08 October, 2011 18:30, Blogger PhilBiker said...

Iirc it was 8 miles by road but less than 2 as the crow flies.

 
At 09 October, 2011 08:18, Blogger Len said...

Small screws etc. fell on Indian Lake about 2 miles from the crash site, paper and IIRC some headrest covers were found 8 miles down wind of the site. All this stray material was found BEYOND the plane's flight path.

 
At 09 October, 2011 08:33, Blogger snug.bug said...

PhilBiker, Popular Mechanics, typically, lied. It's about 4-1/2 miles by road by the most direct route to the closest Indian Lake debris.

CNN reported that debris was found at New Baltimore, 8 miles from the crash site.

http://911research.wtc7.net/cache/planes/attack/cnn_blackboxfound.html

 
At 09 October, 2011 08:58, Blogger Richard Gage's Testicles said...

CNN reported that debris was found at New Baltimore, 8 miles from the crash site.

That link you provide cannot be trusted. CNN did report, though, that the debris was "very light material such as paper and thin nylon -- things that in the air with the wind would easily blow."

 
At 09 October, 2011 09:12, Blogger snug.bug said...

They reported that an authority made that claim. Unfortunately we can not trust reporters to distinguish between facts and authorities' lies or speculations.

 
At 09 October, 2011 13:07, Blogger M Gregory Ferris said...

It's 1.29 miles from the crash site to Indian lake. They found some papers and a purse there

 
At 10 October, 2011 09:02, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

Unfortunately we can not trust reporters to distinguish between facts and authorities' lies or speculations.

And of course you don't live any where near Shanksville and I happen to be close to it, about 20 miles North to be exact.

So who will people believe?

1: Me, because I live 20 miles away.

OR

2: Some nutcase that's out in California and doesn't know anything relevent to Flight 93.

 
At 10 October, 2011 10:39, Blogger snug.bug said...

Nobody should believe you because you make up your facts and your lie.

People should believe me because I check my facts. I am thus not commenting on the 93 debris issue until archive.org finishes its maintenance and I may thus check the news stories that told of the nature of the debris in Indian Lake and at New Baltimore.

In the meantime, perhaps you can make something up to explain how debris blew 8 miles from the crash site on a 9 mph breeze.

 
At 10 October, 2011 11:23, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

Nobody should believe you because you make up your facts and your lie.

So you're saying that people should believe you because you live over 2,000 miles away rather than me (who lives 20 miles away?

Yeah right Brian, tell me another story how you know so much about something which you didn't see.

People should believe me because I check my facts.

The Truth Movement doesn't even believe you anymore, so what does that tell us?

In the meantime, perhaps you can make something up to explain how debris blew 8 miles from the crash site on a 9 mph breeze

Indian Lake is 1.5 miles from Flt. 93's crash site. If I wantedto get to Indian Lake I'd have to use roads.

Brian, you don't live here, so do yourself a favor, fuck off.

 
At 10 October, 2011 11:52, Blogger snug.bug said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 10 October, 2011 11:58, Blogger snug.bug said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 10 October, 2011 12:03, Blogger snug.bug said...

Your proximity to the site is irrelevant because you're a liar.

New Baltimore is 8 miles from the crash site as the crow flies. Are you so ignorant you don't know that, or are you playing dumb? How did debris blow 8 miles on a 9 mph breeze?

If the same thing had happened in DC and NYC we should have seen debris from flight 77 blowing all the way to CIA HQ in McLean, VA; and we should have seen debris from flight 175 blowing all the way to Marine Park in Brooklyn.

 
At 10 October, 2011 14:05, Blogger J Rebori said...

"and we should have seen debris from flight 175 blowing all the way to Marine Park in Brooklyn."

Do you mean like this?

http://landofpuregold.com/truth109.htm

Can't copy and paste from the page, but it mentions the debris from the WTC that settled onto Marine Park in Brooklyn.

 
At 10 October, 2011 16:33, Blogger Ian said...

Nobody should believe you because you make up your facts and your lie.

Squeal squeal squeal!

Brian, you lie all the time. You claim you went to college even though you're a failed janitor. You claim you're not petgoat even though you're the only person who can "explain" meatball on a fork, and you claim you didn't stalk Carol Brouillet even though AE911truth threw you out of the group for just that reason.

 
At 10 October, 2011 16:36, Blogger Ian said...

New Baltimore is 8 miles from the crash site as the crow flies. Are you so ignorant you don't know that, or are you playing dumb? How did debris blow 8 miles on a 9 mph breeze?

Brian, did you know that ash from the 1980 eruption fell on Yakima, Washington, which is over 75 miles away from the volcano?

Obviously, Mt. St. Helens was an inside job. They even found evidence of pyroclastic flows at the base of the mountain!

 
At 10 October, 2011 17:29, Blogger Mike Rosefierce said...

"Obviously, Mt. St. Helens was an inside job."

Some quotes from witnesses of the Mt. St. Helens eruption:

"...I remember hearing what sounded like a low rumble of a jet plane..." [1]

"[I] heard a series of blasts that sounded like nearby cannon fire." [2]

"At the moment of the big eruption, we heard & felt a series of explosions which sounded like someone using dynamite..." [3]

I think a new investigation is in order.

 
At 10 October, 2011 17:59, Blogger Arcterus said...

People should believe me because I check my facts.

And yet, you're constantly being proven wrong. I guess that's the part everyone has a problem with.

 
At 10 October, 2011 19:29, Blogger Richard Gage's Testicles said...

How did debris blow 8 miles on a 9 mph breeze?

The same way one can drive from East Palo Alto to Fresno with a 65 mph speed limit. By taking more than one hour.

 
At 10 October, 2011 20:32, Blogger snug.bug said...

Debris from the WTC is not debris from the airplane, JR. As usual the relevance of your information exists only in your imagination.

Ian, you lie and lie and lie. I warned you years ago that lying is a bad habit that leads to an inability to recognize what reality is, but you wouldn't listen.

So what's your point, Mike? There was a volcano inside the twin towers?

Arcterus, when was I ever proven wrong? These clowns just lie, and then pour on the dataspam, deny that they said what they said, and then claim they've proven me wrong. They do it again and again and again, and lazy lurkers like you are dumb enough to believe their lying claims.

So now JR is going to start in again about how the NYT and WaPo and Merriam-Webster don't know what impeachment means.

So RGT, you think debris from flight 93 defied gravity for an hour? Gosh, it must have started out at about 10,000 feet if it did, and then it would probably go further than 8 miles before it found the ground.

 
At 10 October, 2011 20:48, Blogger Richard Gage's Testicles said...

So RGT, you think debris from flight 93 defied gravity for an hour?

No. I think the explosion plus the wind blew it to wherever it was found. Wind can push papers along at ground level. I've seen it happen.

Meterologists for 9/11 Truth will be along any moment to school me, I'm sure.

 
At 10 October, 2011 20:59, Blogger Richard Gage's Testicles said...

Obviously, Mt. St. Helens was an inside job.

There were multiple warnings... never acted on. The USGS LIED.... said they had no way of predicting the eruption. Even with warnings a year beforehand. Nobody was fired, even the seismologists in our government who have MORE THAN EARNED the title of suspect for the crime of Mt. St. Helens. Media has forgotten.... still no justice for Harry Truman.... but.... whatever.

-- Jon Gold, finding new things to be bitter about

 
At 10 October, 2011 22:45, Blogger Arcterus said...

Arcterus, when was I ever proven wrong?

Hmm, let me think...I think it was back when you said EVERYTHING YOU HAVE EVER POSTED ON THIS WEBSITE. You're the one who is to dumb to understand when he's been proven wrong. It doesn't matter how obvious it is, you usually can't even understand what it is being said, let alone refute it. You certainly can't accept it.

 
At 10 October, 2011 23:07, Blogger snug.bug said...

If wind pushed the debris along the ground, then it should be all along the ground between the crash site and its furthest extent. But it seems to have been concentrated in New Baltimore--or at least for some reason the FBI wanted to secure an area at New Baltimore and wasn't interested in all the territory between there and the lake.

Arcterus, I once thought you were a fairly bright young man. You are letting this bunch of mush-heads here really degrade your standards. The "everything you ever said" response isn't even worthy of an 8-year-old girl.

 
At 11 October, 2011 07:47, Blogger John said...

People should believe me because I check my facts.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=chVPi-CZ34E

 
At 11 October, 2011 09:57, Blogger Pat Cowardly said...

"Hmm, let me think...I think it was back when you said EVERYTHING YOU HAVE EVER POSTED ON THIS WEBSITE."


Translation: I have NOTHING. I'm just here to be a dick.

Thanks for making that even clearer for everyone, son. Are you writing this down, Patrick?

 
At 11 October, 2011 10:28, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

Your proximity to the site is irrelevant because you're a liar.

I'm closer than you'd ever be, so you're just some loon that lives over 2,000 miles away and whatever you say can't be proven because you lack evidence.


Flight 93 wasn't "shot down", a 200 mph Apache Helicopter (which are stationed @ the Johnstown Airport) can't catch a 500 mph commerical jet. We don't have any jet fighters around where I'm living at. So you claim that Flight 93 was "shot down" by "jet fighters"? Well you're a fucking liar you asshole!

 
At 11 October, 2011 10:33, Blogger Arcterus said...

Arcterus, I once thought you were a fairly bright young man. You are letting this bunch of mush-heads here really degrade your standards. The "everything you ever said" response isn't even worthy of an 8-year-old girl.

Brian, you are so vastly inferior to me in any scale of intelligence that you have absolutely no right to try and scale my intellect. It would be like the President taking foreign policy advice from Sarah Palin.

Translation: I have NOTHING. I'm just here to be a dick.

It's a hobby of mine, but no. It's a comment on the fact that Brian never notices he's proven wrong despite it being a constant phenomenon. It's silly to bring up one or two examples because it detracts from the real point: That everything he says is wrong, and has been proven to be as such. Even if I did bring up one or two examples, what would be the point? He'd just deny it like he always does, pretending that he wasn't smacked down with logic or facts, trying to refute everything with something completely illogical or invalid, etc.... It's just asking to go down the same road.

 
At 11 October, 2011 10:33, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

http://www.flyjohnstownairport.com/about/military-fact-sheet.htm

The 1-104 Attack Reconnaissance Battalion (ARB) employs 27 Active Duty Guard Soldiers, 337 traditional Guard Soldiers and has 16 Apache helicopters stationed in Johnstown. The Army Aviation Support Facility (AASF) employs 111 full time Federal Technicians to support military aviation operations.

Note: 16 Apache helicopters stationed in Johnstown.

No jet fighters, period!

So Brian thinks I'm a "liar" because I know WTF I'm talking about and he doesn't?

 
At 11 October, 2011 10:38, Blogger John said...

Translation: I have NOTHING. I'm just here to be a dick.

Why do the truthers that post here always accuse others of what they are themselves?

And, once again, Cowardly's post is another giant step towards a new investigation!

 
At 11 October, 2011 10:44, Blogger Pat Cowardly said...

Stop digging, Arcterus. "So much evidence I can't provide any" is the foolish cry of shitbirds like Pat, James, Bush, Obama, and other miserable assholes who have no sources, proof, or case at all.

BTW: howling about your "intelligence", and then saying "smacked down with logic or facts" tells us a lot about you. And your "intelligence"

 
At 11 October, 2011 10:46, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

Pat Cowardly's confession: "I'm just here to be a dick."

Of course, we knew all along that you were a dick.

 
At 11 October, 2011 10:47, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

and other miserable assholes who have no sources, proof, or case at all.

So you're speaking the truth about yourself?

 
At 11 October, 2011 11:10, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

New Baltimore is 8 miles from the crash site as the crow flies. Are you so ignorant you don't know that, or are you playing dumb? How did debris blow 8 miles on a 9 mph breeze

So what? Paper from both Towers landed a good distance away and that tells us that paper can manage to stay aloft if there's a good stready breeze. There's nothing new about what Mother Nature does.

 
At 11 October, 2011 11:15, Blogger Richard Gage's Testicles said...

BTW: howling about your "intelligence", and then saying "smacked down with logic or facts" tells us a lot about you.

There is no question that debunkers (and ex-truthers) are more intelligent than truthers. That's a simple, observable fact.

 
At 11 October, 2011 11:43, Blogger Pat Cowardly said...

Now WAQy and Testicles feel the need to blurt out their empty inanities too. If that doesn't prove the mental might of you 'debunkers', I don't know what does!

Yeah, the "intelligence" is piling up nice and steamy around here, per usual. Right up around Pat's bulbous, horrifically misshapen face.

 
At 11 October, 2011 12:01, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

If that doesn't prove the mental might of you 'debunkers', I don't know what does!

You act like a child who got abused early in childhood. I guess mommy and daddy didn't pay attention to you.

Two traits you have there "Einstein": Paranoid Personality Disorder and BiPolar Syndrome.

 
At 11 October, 2011 12:22, Blogger Pat Cowardly said...

"Two traits you have there "Einstein": Paranoid Personality Disorder and BiPolar Syndrome."

Wake us up when you debunk something, chewy. Anything.

Pat and James could really use your help.

 
At 11 October, 2011 12:23, Blogger Richard Gage's Testicles said...

Now WAQy and Testicles feel the need to blurt out their empty inanities too.

Any time is a good time to mock the stupid. Truthers are stupid. Debunkers are smart. Accept it.

 
At 11 October, 2011 12:31, Blogger M Gregory Ferris said...

Hey, Pat Cuntly, why do you only post when you're on your period?

You and your dickless friends are the ones making outragious so you are the ones who need proof.

You have present none because you have none

By the way, say hi to your mom, you won't recognize her because I shaved her back.

 
At 11 October, 2011 14:53, Blogger snug.bug said...

WAQo no paper from the airplanes flew ten miles from Ground Zero. Your framing of "paper can stay aloft" has nothing to do with paper from the airplane at Shanksville unless you're claiming that the hull was breached while the plane was still in the air.

So RGT, are you calling Dr. Lynn Margulis, Dr. Peter Dale Scott, Dr. Daniel Ellsberg, and Dr. Robert Bowman dumb? Among the 1600 architects and engineers calling for new investigations are 2 PhD architects and 46 PhD engineers. Are you calling them dumb?

MGF, you're spelling is attroceous.

 
At 11 October, 2011 14:53, Blogger Pat Cowardly said...

"Truthers are stupid. Debunkers are smart." -Testicles

"You and your dickless friends are the ones making outragious (sic), (sic) so you are the ones who need proof." "You have present (sic) none because you have none (sic)" -M. Fucking Barrassing

Couldn't you wait a single post before demolishing Testicles' iron-clad argument, M. Gregory?

 
At 11 October, 2011 15:13, Blogger Richard Gage's Testicles said...

So RGT, are you calling Dr. Lynn Margulis, Dr. Peter Dale Scott, Dr. Daniel Ellsberg, and Dr. Robert Bowman dumb? Among the 1600 architects and engineers calling for new investigations are 2 PhD architects and 46 PhD engineers. Are you calling them dumb?

Yes. Academic credentials don't make one intelligent. Neither does intelligence make one correct.

There's such a thing as academic or scientific minorities, but 9/11 Truth falls well outside the "minority" category and into the "fringe" bucket. Failure to recognize when you're on fringes makes you dumb. It's primarily a failure of self-perception.

 
At 11 October, 2011 15:25, Blogger GuitarBill said...

Yo Mr. Bogus "scientific reputation"! Demonstrate your alleged "math skills" and estimate how many g's flight 93 was subjected to as was in a steep, downward decent. Bear in mind that the flight smashed into the ground at 563 miles per hour (906 km/h) at a 40 degree, nose-down, inverted orientation.

And when you're finished fucking up that calculation, tell us how many g's the Boeing 757–222 aircraft was built to withstand.

And when you're finished fucking all that up, uncork another bottle of your "scientific" effluent and tell us that it's unlikely or impossible for the aircraft to have come apart prior to the impact. And then in your typically dishonest fashion, lie to us and claim that there's no logical explanation for the breadth of the debris field without resorting to troofer 'tard conspiracy theories.

Cretin.

 
At 11 October, 2011 15:52, Blogger Ian said...

Ian, you lie and lie and lie. I warned you years ago that lying is a bad habit that leads to an inability to recognize what reality is, but you wouldn't listen.

My, such squealing!

So what's your point, Mike? There was a volcano inside the twin towers?

That's what Richard Gage apparently believes, otherwise he wouldn't blather about "pyroclastic flows".

 
At 11 October, 2011 15:55, Blogger Ian said...

So RGT, are you calling Dr. Lynn Margulis, Dr. Peter Dale Scott, Dr. Daniel Ellsberg, and Dr. Robert Bowman dumb? Among the 1600 architects and engineers calling for new investigations are 2 PhD architects and 46 PhD engineers. Are you calling them dumb?

They might not be dumb, just insane. You, on the other hand, are both insane and an idiot.

Also, can you keep babbling about paper flying through the air? It would be yet another hilarious episode of you digging your heels in over something completely irrelevant.

 
At 11 October, 2011 16:58, Blogger J Rebori said...

"Stop digging, Arcterus. "So much evidence I can't provide any" is the foolish cry of shitbirds like Pat, James, Bush, Obama, and other miserable assholes who have no sources, proof, or case at all. "

Of course the fact he has been proven wrong so many times that he starts off by trying to "poison the well" and discredit the times he has already been proven wrong should be proof enough to anyone rational that he is trying to hide from the glaring light of reality that keeps shriveling up his unsupported claims of easily debunked idiocy.

Want proof of him doing that, it's just a little ways back up this page where, without any mention of it from me, he blurts out

"So now JR is going to start in again about how the NYT and WaPo and Merriam-Webster don't know what impeachment means."

as he attempts to cover up one of the many times he failed in his arguments.

 
At 11 October, 2011 19:07, Blogger M Gregory Ferris said...

Hey Brian, you still haven't told us why you were kicked out of college.

 
At 11 October, 2011 21:47, Blogger snug.bug said...

You can always trust Utterfail to be pretending that challenging me to find a tennis ball at the pool hall means something.

None of the official investigators assert that the hull was breached before the plane hit the ground. Of course, they could be lying to protect Boeing, because they think it would be bad for business to admit that airliners can come apart from flight stresses. They could be lying to cover up the presence of a bomb on board, which would also be bad for business. They could be lying to cover up a shootdown or a takedown by electronic interference with the 757's controls. But in Utterfail's world, official lies are to be expected. And somehow he can believe that his conspiracy theory obviates a real investigation.

Ian, I have told you many times that a British Professor of Geophysics and the Columbia geologists have used "pyroclastic" to describe the WTC clouds. Actually Gage says "pyroclastic-like" but you're as poorly equipped to handle nuance as you are to handle fact.

JR, still more empty posturing from you.

MGF, are you projecting?

 
At 11 October, 2011 22:08, Blogger GuitarBill said...

That's not an answer, goat fucker, it's an evasion.

And don't quote the official explanation--you hypocrite. You can't have it both ways--you logical fallacy spewing retard.

Let's try again, cretin: [1] Demonstrate your alleged "math skills" and estimate how many g's flight 93 was subjected to as was in a steep, downward decent. Bear in mind that flight 93 smashed into the ground at 563 miles per hour (906 km/h) at a 40 degree, nose-down, inverted orientation; [2] how many g's was the Boeing 757–222 aircraft built to withstand?

You won't answer the questions because to do so will expose your entire idiotic theory as the fantasy of a demented, glue-sniffing old hippie with mommy issues.

Coward. Science illiterate. Liar.

Come on Mr. Bogus "scientific reputation," put your money where your mouth is--you lying, deranged, educated in a trailer-park sex predator who wears women's underwear.

You have one more chance to answer the questions or you stand exposed, once again, as a lying charlatan.

 
At 11 October, 2011 22:18, Blogger snug.bug said...

You're the one who wants to have it both ways, idiot. You're the kind of hypocrite who wants to tell us that no, God didn't really part the seas for Moses, really Moses just led his people into the marsh at low tide--but that's OK, we should still believe the Bible.

All you do is repeat the same irrational challenge to find a tennis ball in a pool hall. Your G-forces have nothing to do with wreckage landing 8 miles away.

What theory are you accusing me of putting forth? All I have done is point out the weaknesses in the theories you guys put forth to explain the debris 8 miles from the crash site. I don't need a theory. I have facts.

 
At 11 October, 2011 22:31, Blogger GuitarBill said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 11 October, 2011 22:44, Blogger GuitarBill said...

That's not an answer, goat fucker, it's an evasion.

And don't give me that "[n]one of the official investigators assert that the hull was breached before the plane hit the ground" malarkey. Investigators didn't recover the entire aircraft. They were only able to recover a little over 98% of the aircraft. So where did the rest of the aircraft and its contents go? And don't forget to violate the laws of thermodynamics--you physics illiterate charlatan.

As I stated earlier, you refuse to answer the questions because to do so will expose your entire theory as the fantasy of a deranged, third-rate "intellect" who wears women's underwear and has deep, dark mommy issues.

But you'll never answer the questions, so...

End of debate. You lose by forfeit. Your continued refusal to answer legitimate question(s) is a violation of the rules of debate and an act of bad faith; thus, once again, you lose.

Do you see the fatal flaw in your "cognitive process," cretin? The Socratic method will always be your downfall.

FAIL.

 
At 11 October, 2011 22:46, Blogger snug.bug said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 11 October, 2011 22:48, Blogger snug.bug said...

None of the official investigators have suggested that the hull was breached before impact. That's a fact and you dismiss it as malarky.

Your boilerplate "you lose by default" nonsense is a real hoot. I bet you say that to all the guys.

Your "Socratic method" is to ask a meaningless and irrelevant question and pretend that it is important.

 
At 11 October, 2011 22:54, Blogger GuitarBill said...

That's not an answer, goat fucker, it's an evasion.

Furthermore, you don't have the authority to determine whether a question is "meaningless and irrelevant"--you arrogant, self-serving, third-rate "intellect" and shameless liar.

Once again, you utterly FAIL, while trampling on the rules of debate.

Yo Mr. Bogus "scientific reputation"! Since the investigators recovered 98% of the aircraft, your idiotic theory has another serious problem: Are you, with a straight face, trying to assert that a heat seeking missile would only manage to damage 2% of the aircraft?

You're an idiot.

FAIL.

 
At 11 October, 2011 23:05, Blogger GuitarBill said...

The goat fucker squeals, "...Your G-forces have nothing to do with wreckage landing 8 miles away."

[GuitarBill shakes his head in amazement].

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

You're an idiot.

FAIL.

 
At 12 October, 2011 00:10, Blogger snug.bug said...

UtterFail, I'm not maintaining anything except the facts. You are the one who suggested that, in contradiction to all official reports, the hull of flight 93 was breached--which then implies an official conspiracy to cover that up.

Your G-forces have nothing to do with debris landing 8 miles away. You pull your nonsense out of your ass.

 
At 12 October, 2011 06:55, Blogger Pat Cowardly said...

Of course the fact he has been proven wrong so many times that he starts off by trying to "poison the well" ... -J. Repulsive

So much evidence, J can't provide any either. With all this "evidence" piling up, you kids should check your pants for some sources, too!

 
At 12 October, 2011 08:22, Blogger Richard Gage's Testicles said...

With all this "evidence" piling up, you kids should check your pants for some sources, too!

Be my guest.

 
At 12 October, 2011 09:18, Blogger GuitarBill said...

The goat fucker dissembles, "...You are the one who suggested that, in contradiction to all official reports, the hull of flight 93 was breached"

That's double-talk, goat fucker. Your entire argument is in contradiction to the official report--you duplicitous wanker.

Why do you constantly contradict yourself and talk out of both sides of your mouth, goat fucker?

Have you always been a logical fallacy spewing idiot, or do you work at it?

There is every possibility that a momentary breach of the cargo hatch occurred. The aircraft was subjected to g-forces in excess of the aircraft's capacity to withstand, so a breach of the cargo hull is a real possibility. I'm not, however, insisting that's a 100% certainty. My explanation, however, is a Hell of a lot more probable than your idiotic shoot down theory.

Furthermore, flight 93's fuel supply was near capacity. That means there was a huge fireball when the aircraft crashed. That fireball would cause debris to scatter over miles (a thermal to be precise. The same principle that allows large birds of prey--eagles and hawks, for example--to glide).

So goat fucker, answer the question: Are you, with a straight face, trying to assert that a heat seeking missile would only manage to damage 2% of the aircraft?

Gosh goat fucker, what would your sleazy friend's at the Ford Foundation think if they discovered that you trample on the rules of debate and refuse to answer questions?

Or is your inability to preform a simple calculation without making huge errors the real reason that you refuse to do the g-force calculations?

In either case, you're full of shit. You make up your facts. And you lie like a rug and contradict yourself constantly.

FAIL.

 
At 12 October, 2011 09:34, Blogger GuitarBill said...

And don't try to weasel out of owning up to the shoot down theory you're trying to promote. It's no secret that troofers cite flight 93's "debris pattern" as evidence for their "in contradiction to all official reports" shoot down theory.

 
At 12 October, 2011 11:13, Blogger snug.bug said...

When did I espouse a shoot-down theory? How come the official report doesn't say anything about G-forces or cargo hatches? If the cargo hatch came open, then NTSB should have been permitted to do an investigation to determine exactly why it came open and how that could be prevented. Iceland Air flight 315 survived G-forces of +3.59.

How come the 9/11 Commission won't release the documents that it cites for its 10:06 crash time, which contradicts the 10:03 seismographic time?

Sometimes facts contradict each other. Us reality-based types can live with that. Guys like you get all anxious with contradictions, so you deny facts to try to do away with them.

If fireballs cause debris to scatter for miles, how come debris from flight 77 didn't scatter for miles? If the debris was scattered for miles, how come it was concentrated at New Baltimore, and not in the area between New Baltimore and the lake? Why did the authorities cordon off New Baltimore and why aren't we allowed to know?

UtterFail, if you knew anything about anything you would know that a heat-seeking missile will seek out the engines of the aircraft. In 1978 2 heat-seeking missiles were fired at Korean Air flight 902, damaging its left wing. 40 minutes later the 707 landed on a frozen lake.

You clearly live in a faith-based reality.

 
At 12 October, 2011 13:32, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

WAQo no paper from the airplanes flew ten miles from Ground Zero.

Simple physics my dear idiotic friend, if wind can blow paper miles away anythings possible.

Your framing of "paper can stay aloft" has nothing to do with paper from the airplane at Shanksville unless you're claiming that the hull was breached while the plane was still in the air.

So you're claiming that the hull was breached because you think it got "shot down" by an attack helicopter?

None of the official investigators have suggested that the hull was breached before impact. That's a fact and you dismiss it as malarky.

So was the hull breached or was it "shot down"? Make up your fucking mind Brian.

UtterFail, I'm not maintaining anything except the facts.

And above your "facts" are misleading. Going back an forth from "hull breach" to "shoot down" theories.

Brian, you have double standards about your theories.

 
At 12 October, 2011 13:47, Blogger Richard Gage's Testicles said...

If the debris was scattered for miles, how come it was concentrated at New Baltimore, and not in the area between New Baltimore and the lake?

There's no evidence that debris was concentrated at New Baltimore. You're making that up.

 
At 12 October, 2011 14:05, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

http://www.flight93crash.com/flight93_secondary_debris_field.html

Spallone said the plane was still smoldering at 12:30. He said officials were trying to keep people from scene and confirmed that there are no survivors. He said the "debris field spread over an area size of a football field, maybe two footballs fields."

Above contradicts what Brian said earlier about the debris being found in New Baltimore.

Here's where Brian probably got his "info":

"Pennsylvania state police officials said on Thursday debris from the plane had been found up to 8 miles (13 km) away in a residential community where local media have quoted residents who were flying kites as having a conversation of a second plane in the area and burning debris falling from the sky."

So a fe residents were flying kites that day. Makes sense!

 
At 12 October, 2011 14:06, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

Brian lied about the debris being found in New Baltimore and he totally took out the fact that a few people were kite flying that day.

Brian has really fucked up this theory of his.

 
At 12 October, 2011 15:04, Blogger snug.bug said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 12 October, 2011 15:05, Blogger snug.bug said...

On Planet WAQo, "simple physics" means "anything's possible". Thanks for clearing that up, WAQo. Simple physics says that if stuff blew there on the wind, that you ought to be getting less and less debris on the ground the further away you get. Instead we get the FBI cordoning off an area 6 to 8 miles away, but not an area closer. CNN said it was strange. But you don't.

There's no necessarily any contradiction between a hull breech and being shot down. The
Pittburg Tribune-Review said there was debris in New Baltimore.
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/s_12967.html

You guys seem determined to demonstrate your irrationality and your ignorance. And what do the kites have to do with anything?

RGT, the evidence that the debris was concentrated is that the FBI cordoned off a distant area but not a closer area. Of course maybe it was the nature of the debris that interested the FBI rather than the mass. Would you like to speculate on what could so much interest them?

 
At 12 October, 2011 18:19, Blogger Richard Gage's Testicles said...

RGT, the evidence that the debris was concentrated is that the FBI cordoned off a distant area but not a closer area.

You're saying no other areas besides the crash site and the New Baltimore site were cordoned off? What makes you think that?

Incidentally, why do you think it was the FBI doing to cordoning-off?

 
At 12 October, 2011 23:54, Blogger snug.bug said...

I think that because that is the information I have from my review of the available news sources and nobody has provided me with any information contrary to that.

I think the FBI did the cordoning because CNN said so.

 
At 13 October, 2011 05:01, Blogger Richard Gage's Testicles said...

I think that because that is the information I have from my review of the available news sources and nobody has provided me with any information contrary to that.

You're assuming it, in other words.

I think the FBI did the cordoning because CNN said so.

Where?

 
At 13 October, 2011 07:42, Blogger Ian said...

Ian, I have told you many times that a British Professor of Geophysics and the Columbia geologists have used "pyroclastic" to describe the WTC clouds. Actually Gage says "pyroclastic-like" but you're as poorly equipped to handle nuance as you are to handle fact.

False and false.

Brian, you do realize that lying isn't going to get the widows questions answered, right?

 
At 13 October, 2011 09:51, Blogger Pat Cowardly said...

"False and false."
-Ian

Do you plan to prove this claim, or just let your empty bluster do your talking for you? You realize that your words are less than meaningless if you don't substantiate them somehow, don't you? Or are you Pat?

 
At 13 October, 2011 10:54, Blogger snug.bug said...

RGT, if you don't know that CNN said the FBI cordoned off the secondary debris field then you haven't done the most cursory investigation.

Check the historycommons 9/11 timeline. That is a goldmine of mainstream news reporting.

 
At 13 October, 2011 11:35, Blogger GuitarBill said...

The goat fucker lies, "...Ian, I have told you many times that a British Professor of Geophysics and the Columbia geologists have used "pyroclastic" to describe the WTC clouds. Actually Gage says "pyroclastic-like" but you're as poorly equipped to handle nuance as you are to handle fact."

That's a bald-faced lie.

Here's the truth:

Wikipedia wrote, "...A pyroclastic flow (also known scientifically as a pyroclastic density current) is a fast-moving current of superheated gas (which can reach temperatures of about 1,000 °C (1,830 °F)) and rock (collectively known as tephra), which reaches speeds moving away from a volcano of up to 700 km/h (450 mph)...They may also contain steam, water and rock at less than 250 °C (482 °F); these are called "cold" compared with other flows, although the temperature is still lethally high."

So goat fucker--you scurrilous liar--how many people were poached alive like a kettle fish at Ground Zero as a result of your alleged "pyroclastic flow"?

The conservative answer: ZIP. NADA. ZILCH. ZERO.

You make up your "facts."

Once again, you FAIL.

 
At 13 October, 2011 11:40, Blogger GuitarBill said...

Pyro--you fucking idiot--comes from the Greek and means fire, burn, burning, heat, produced by heating, hot. And sometimes to "fever."

Good job, Mr. Bogus "scientific reputation."

FAIL.

 
At 13 October, 2011 11:51, Blogger GuitarBill said...

The goat fucker squeals, "...Ian, [d]o you plan to prove this claim, or just let your empty bluster do your talking for you? You realize that your words are less than meaningless if you don't substantiate them somehow, don't you?"

More bullshit--you duplicitous liar?

Too bad you never hold yourself to that "standard of evidence."

FAIL.

 
At 13 October, 2011 12:03, Blogger GuitarBill said...

The goat fucker dissembles, "...When did I espouse a shoot-down theory?"

How about your comments at the following time stamps: [1] 10 October, 2011 20:32 and [2] 12 October, 2011 11:13.

The goat fucker continues to dissemble, "...How come the official report doesn't say anything about G-forces or cargo hatches?"

Answering my questions with questions isn't debate, it's deceit.

The "official report," which you rely so heavy upon, also says flight 93 was brought down by the hijackers.

How does that contradiction square with your reliance on the "official report"?

You talk out of both sides of your mealy mouth.

The goat fucker dissembles, "...Iceland Air flight 315 survived G-forces of +3.59."

3.59 G?????

Flight 93 was subjected to a much high gravitational force. Do the calculations--you charlatan.

Oh, that's right! You'll screw up the calculation. Never mind.

FAIL.

 
At 13 October, 2011 12:09, Blogger GuitarBill said...

Continued...

The goat fucker dissembles, "...How come the 9/11 Commission won't release the documents that it cites for its 10:06 crash time, which contradicts the 10:03 seismographic time?"

Again, answering my questions with questions isn't debate, it's deceit.

The goat fucker dissembles, "...If fireballs cause debris to scatter for miles, how come debris from flight 77 didn't scatter for miles?"

You're comparing apples to oranges, goat fucker?

FAIL.

The goat fucker squeals, "...if you knew anything about anything you would know that a heat-seeking missile will seek out the engines of the aircraft. In 1978 2 heat-seeking missiles were fired at Korean Air flight 902, damaging its left wing. 40 minutes later the 707 landed on a frozen lake."

Yet, flight 93 crashed. Thus, your comparison is just as invalid as everything else you've written.

And I thought you claimed to not "espouse a shoot-down theory"?

Talking out of both sides of your mouth again, goat fucker?

Of course you are.

FAIL.

 
At 13 October, 2011 12:32, Blogger Ian said...

Guitar Bill, Brian just repeats what Richard Gage says, no matter how idiotic. That's how he came upon pyroclastic flows.

Back several years ago when Brian was first posting his dumbspam on this blog, the whole "pyroclastic flows" thing came up and Brian of course dug his heels in, insisting that the dust clouds from the towers were indeed pyroclastic flows, no matter how much evidence was presented to the contrary.

That's when I stopped trying to debate him and just started mocking him. It's much more fun that way, and it annoys the shit out of him, if his squealing to Pat and James about me are any indication.

 
At 13 October, 2011 12:37, Blogger GuitarBill said...

You're right, Ian. I should never "debate" the goat fucker. It's a complete waste of time.

After all, he's a compulsive liar who wears women's underwear and has a mind of mush.

He doesn't have the intellectual integrity to "debate," thus all he deserves is ridicule.

 
At 13 October, 2011 13:35, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

On Planet WAQo, "simple physics" means "anything's possible". Thanks for clearing that up, WAQo. Simple physics says that if stuff blew there on the wind, that you ought to be getting less and less debris on the ground the further away you get. Instead we get the FBI cordoning off an area 6 to 8 miles away, but not an area closer. CNN said it was strange. But you don't.

I just handed your own ass to you Brian and all you can muster up is a squealing remarks?


There's no necessarily any contradiction between a hull breech and being shot down. The
Pittburg Tribune-Review said there was debris in New Baltimore.
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/s_12967.html


You can't have both, which is it?:

A: Shoot Down
B: Hull Breach

You guys seem determined to demonstrate your irrationality and your ignorance. And what do the kites have to do with anything?

So you're saying that you hate people who fly kites since a few of them happen to be kite flying that day and didn't pay attention to what was happening?

Brian is doing what Alex Jones did when Jayep lied about that RFID chip implant. Brian is backpeddling like his sex idol, Alex Jones.

 
At 13 October, 2011 13:48, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/s_12967

The above link just took me to the Home page of TribLive. Nothing on there says anything about Flight 93 or the debris being found in New Baltimore. Again Brian is making up shit as usual!

 
At 13 October, 2011 14:13, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

No matter how many times Brian ignores this statement, he can NEVER change it:

"Pennsylvania state police officials said on Thursday debris from the plane had been found up to 8 miles (13 km) away in a residential community where local media have quoted residents who were flying kites as having a conversation of a second plane in the area and burning debris falling from the sky."

So, since there were people kite flying and they said that there was a "second plane" in the area then that only means one possible thing: They weren't paying attention to what was happening.

Since they couldn't have been paying attention, then they assume that the debris came from Flight 93, when in reality the debris was only a few football fields away from the crash site. And since they claim to have seen a "second plane" then they couldn't have IDed Flight 93 8 or 10 miles away.

So Brian is telling some huge white lies and stretching the truth.

 
At 13 October, 2011 14:38, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

Brian: "The debris was found 8 miles away."

Debunker: "How can it be when the FBI, the coroner and witnesses say that the debris was within 1.5 miles from the crash site?"

Brian: "You're lying."

Debunker: "The FBI, coroner and witesses where there, you calling them "liars"?

Brian: "No, I'm calling you a liar."

Debunker: "How can I be "lying". Are you implying that I'm with the FBI, or was the coroner or one of the witnesses?"

Brian: "Because you are."

Debunker: "I get it, you think that since I'm with the FBI,or the coroner or one of the witnesses that I must be "lying". So what you're saying is that they're the ones "lying" and not me?"

Brian: "You don't know what you're talking about."

Debunker: "But I do understand that you're calling the FBI, coroner and witnesses "liars"."

Brian goes and hides in shame.

 
At 13 October, 2011 15:14, Blogger Richard Gage's Testicles said...

RGT, if you don't know that CNN said the FBI cordoned off the secondary debris field then you haven't done the most cursory investigation.

CNN didn't say that. If you're referring to the September 13 CNN report then you're reading it wrong.

 
At 13 October, 2011 16:40, Blogger snug.bug said...

Look at gutterball, trying to debunk a professor of Geophysics by using a quote from wikipedia.

I'm sorry you are logically deficient, but it's not my fault. You obviously function on a faith-based level, you got yourself some technical training which gacve you an unjustifiably exalted opinion of yourself, and now you're a washed-up code monkey who lacks the intellectual capacity to re-invent yourself.

WAQo, since the shoot-down of KAL 902 involved a hull breach, there is obviously no contradiction between hull breach and shoot-down. If you had done half a job of checking your facts you would know this.

You're lying about the link. TYhe link I provided is this one:
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/s_12967.html

It goes right to a story about debris at New Baltimore.

Your kites have nothing to do with debris. You are only trying to confuse.

 
At 13 October, 2011 17:36, Blogger GuitarBill said...

The goat fucker dissembles, "...Look at gutterball, trying to debunk a professor of Geophysics by using a quote from wikipedia."

Wrong again, goat fucker. I'm sorry that you're "logically deficient," but prepare for another ass whooping.

The relevant Wikipedia footnotes are numbers 1, 2 and 4, which I'll reproduce below:

[1] Branney M.J. & Kokelaar, B.P. 2002, Pyroclastic Density Currents and the Sedimentation of Ignimbrites. Geological Society London Memoir 27, 143pp.

[2] Pyroclastic flows USGS

and

[4] Arthur N. Strahler (1972), Planet Earth: its physical systems through geological time.

Here are their academic qualifications:

M.J. Branney, Ph.D, Department of Geology, University of Sheffield. Member London Geological Society.

B. Peter Kokelaar, Ph.D, FGS, Department of Geology, University of Liverpool.

Arthur N. Strahler, Ph.D, Department of Geology, Columbia University. Member London Geological Society.

My three Ph.D's and the USGS trump your lowly troofer charlatan.

Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.

 
At 13 October, 2011 17:45, Blogger Ian said...

Look at gutterball, trying to debunk a professor of Geophysics by using a quote from wikipedia.

Brian, who do you think you're kidding? You can claim that a professor of geophysics said there were pyroclastic flows at the WTC all you want, but you shouldn't expect anyone to believe you. After all, you lie about other experts too, like Dr. Sunder and Dr. Asanteh-Asl. You also lie about yourself ("I'm not petgoat") and you lie about the widows/

 
At 13 October, 2011 18:05, Blogger GuitarBill said...

Yeah, isn't it wonderful that the goat fucker NEVER cites his source?

Too bad that he can't meet his own alleged "standards of evidence."

But then again, should we expect less from an arrogant psychopath, incompetent science illiterate, sex predator, compulsive liar, college dropout and cross-dresser who wears women's underwear?

I guess that's the way it goes when you're an unemployed janitor who thinks projecting his personal failure on others is a substitute for debate.

%^)

 
At 13 October, 2011 19:56, Blogger snug.bug said...

Here's where Columbia University describes the WTC dust clouds:
http://www.earthinstitute.columbia.edu/news/story11_16_01.html

"The fall of the towers was similar to that of a pyroclastic flow down a volcano, where hot dust and chunks of material move in a dust/mud matrix down the volcano’s slope. The collapse of the WTC generated such a flow, though without the high temperatures common in volcanic flows."

 
At 13 October, 2011 20:33, Blogger Ian said...

What a surprise, Brian leaves out the important first part of the sentence that indicates that the clouds looked like a pyroclastic flow. Now why would he do that?

You see, Brian, as someone sane and capable of reason, I will freely concede that the towers collapse produced dust clouds that resembled the pyroclastic surges that race down the slopes of erupting volcanoes.

However, it takes a glue-sniffing liar and failed janitor who doesn't understand volcanoes and who believes in magic thermite elves (i.e. you) to claim that the clouds actually were pyroclastic flows.

 
At 14 October, 2011 02:19, Blogger snug.bug said...

Ianliar, the first part of the sentence did not say what you claim. It said "As seen in television images." It did not say "looked like".

 
At 14 October, 2011 06:34, Blogger Ian said...

Ianliar, the first part of the sentence did not say what you claim. It said "As seen in television images." It did not say "looked like".

Squeal squeal squeal!

Well, we can add another deranged belief to Brian's list. In addition to believing in modified attack baboons, magic thermite elves, and invisible widows, Brian also believes there was a volcano at the WTC.

 
At 14 October, 2011 08:38, Blogger snug.bug said...

I didn't say they were pyroclastic flows.

 
At 14 October, 2011 09:22, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

WAQo, since the shoot-down of KAL 902 involved a hull breach, there is obviously no contradiction between hull breach and shoot-down. If you had done half a job of checking your facts you would know this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Air_Lines_Flight_902

Korean Air Lines Flight 902 (KAL902, KE902) was the flight number of a civilian airliner that was shot down April 20, 1978, near Murmansk, USSR, after it violated Soviet airspace and allegedly failed to respond to Soviet interceptors. Tapes released by Rovaniemi Area Control Centre show that the pilots of KAL902 transmitted their call sign three times immediately prior to the shootdown. Two passengers were killed when Soviet aircraft opened fire on the aircraft. 107 passengers and crew survived after the plane made an emergency landing on a frozen lake.

They violated Soviet airspace. How the fuck is that relevent to what happened on 9/11? It isn't relevent, period!

Stop lying goat fucker!

 
At 14 October, 2011 09:24, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

Every time put this link on the URL search engine it just shows me the Home Page:

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/s_12967

Brian's lying again!

 
At 14 October, 2011 09:25, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

Your kites have nothing to do with debris. You are only trying to confuse.

And your claims have nothing to do with Flight 93. So fuck off!

 
At 14 October, 2011 09:27, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

was similar to that of a pyroclastic flow down a volcano.

In the real world Brian, we call that a SIMILE.

 
At 14 October, 2011 10:13, Blogger Ian said...

I didn't say they were pyroclastic flows.

OK, so the dust clouds from the collapse were not pyroclastic flows. So....why do you continue to babble about this?

 
At 14 October, 2011 10:20, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

Ian,

He continues to do that because he's a troll. For Halloween he wants to be a troll.

Here we can find BRian isn his natural habitat:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FMEe7JqBgvg&ob=av3e

 
At 14 October, 2011 11:29, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

Brian missed 1 digit for that link he has.
v
v
v

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/s_12967.html

"A southeasterly wind and a 3-year-old’s keen eye brought the crash of United Airlines Flight 93 home to a family in tiny New Baltimore borough, more than eight miles from the Somerset County crash site.
Three-year-old Hunter Stoe was helping his father, Andy, with the trash Wednesday night when he spied a slip of paper on the grass near the trash can.

When Andy Stoe glanced at the paper, ready to toss it in the trash, he saw it was a charred payroll check made out to Antonio B. Costa of San Jose, Calif."


“It could have crashed here just as easy as anywhere. Thank God they put it down somewhere unpopulated,” said Stoe, as Hunter pushed a toy bulldozer through his sandbox."

Brian thinks that Flight 93 had a "hull breach". Well since the winds were about 9 knots that day that single paper traveled to New Baltimore. The witnesses never described a "Hull breach" nor did they see a jet fighter behind Flight 93.

The words: "Thank God they put it down somewhere unpopulated." is in refernece to the heroic efforts of the people onboard Flt. 93.

If Brian would love to continue making up shit and lying then I'll have no choice but to throw the facts in his face.

 
At 14 October, 2011 12:11, Blogger Ian said...

For those of us who are interested in learning about the world instead of just mindlessly repeating the lies of Richard Gage, here is a video (German narration) with some good images of pyroclastic flows racing down the slopes of Indonesia's Mount Merapi.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jmroRS6waU4

Yes, it does look like the dust clouds from the WTC collapse. No that doesn't mean they're the same thing.

 
At 15 October, 2011 09:58, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

Brian is trying to compare a volcano to the WTC collapse?

What a maroon!

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home