Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Lloyd England exposed was involved in 9/11 false flag event

1…1011131516…95

Comments

  • #362
    Cheerful Spring
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    King Mob wrote: »
    Dohnjoe's link does a good job of explaining this.

    But again, it's not really nessesary to address when the conspiracy doesn't explain it and the conspiracy doesn't make sense.


    Why would the plane suddenly crash for no reason? Why did it crash and how did no one notice.
    Why would the data go missing from exactly the point of where it would have crashed into the Pentagon and have no other data at all from any other point after. Why was none of the data before that point corrupted?
    If the data was damaged to the point where a huge chunk of it is missing, why would you assume that the rest of the data is perfectly accurate.

    Very suddenly the conspiracy seems to be relying on a lot of strange and lucky coincidences.

    OP in that thread response to this question.

    Quote:
    7. Why does your animation show a flight path north of the reported flight path?

    My animation? I assume you mean NTSB's animation. I can't answer that question, you should ask them.

    OP is speculating and postulating the engineer who made the animation made errors but he doesn't offer evidence for that. I still on the first page, but I going to try read this thread over the next day or so and see what people on here are saying.


  • #363
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 25,874 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Cheerful Spring wrote: »

    OP in that thread response to this question.

    Quote:
    7. Why does your animation show a flight path north of the reported flight path?

    My animation? I assume you mean NTSB's animation. I can't answer that question, you should ask them.

    OP is speculating and postulating the engineer who made the animation made errors but he doesn't offer evidence for that. I still on the first page, but I going to try read this thread over the next day or so and see what people on here are saying.
    And?
    Assuming this is an accurate description of the total of their argument, (it's not.) so what?

    Where's your evidence that the 757 crashed afterwards for no reason and the data was corrupted exactly from the moment it was supposed to have hit the Pentagon for no reason?
    Where's your evidence that there is missing data?

    Why should we believe those huge silly assumptions, but then think that the idea of an engineer making a slight mistake in a random unimportant simulation is a step too far?

    Does the NTSB mention anything about this missing data from the plane's flight from the Pentagon?
    Surely while analysing the data, they'd have seen the damaged parts and mentioned them?


  • #364
    Cheerful Spring
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    King Mob wrote: »
    And?
    Assuming this is an accurate description of the total of their argument, (it's not.) so what?

    Where's your evidence that the 757 crashed afterwards for no reason and the data was corrupted exactly from the moment it was supposed to have hit the Pentagon for no reason?
    Where's your evidence that there is missing data?

    Why should we believe those huge silly assumptions, but then think that the idea of an engineer making a slight mistake in a random unimportant simulation is a step too far?

    Does the NTSB mention anything about this missing data from the plane's flight from the Pentagon?
    Surely while analysing the data, they'd have seen the damaged parts and mentioned them?

    I going to not reply for awhile I going to go through this thread and see what the Skeptics are saying.

    These are some replies by the OP to chew on till then.

    449253.png

    449254.png


    449255.png

    There is no evidence the NTSB data contains errors and not unimportant data. Its flight information about Flight 77 I think ir would be a high priority to release it right?


  • #365
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 25,874 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    =44
    There is no evidence the NTSB data contains errors and not unimportant data.
    Ok, so then even that theory is out then.
    If the data had no errors, then that means that there can't be any missing data.
    So that means the flight could not have continued after the moment the data stopped.
    You'd said it's impossible that the data was manipulated. It can't have been corrupted by a crash later and extra data could not have just vanished.

    So the only conclusion that you can possibly reach using your own assertions is that the plane crashed at the Pentagon.

    Otherwise you have to conclude that the data is in error or it was edited, which also is incompatible with the conspiracy.

    You've painted yourself into a pretty silly corner here.


  • #366
    Cheerful Spring
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Only on page one and this poster just bashed them silly. I notice this on this thread here too, deflection



    449256.png


  • Advertisement
  • #367
    Cheerful Spring
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    King Mob wrote: »
    Ok, so then even that theory is out then.
    If the data had no errors, then that means that there can't be any missing data.
    So that means the flight could not have continued after the moment the data stopped.
    You'd said it's impossible that the data was manipulated. It can't have been corrupted by a crash later and extra data could not have just vanished.

    So the only conclusion that you can possibly reach using your own assertions is that the plane crashed at the Pentagon.

    Otherwise you have to conclude that the data is in error or it was edited, which also is incompatible with the conspiracy.

    You've painted yourself into a pretty silly corner here.

    Missing data is only the last two seconds. We have over 1 hour and 30 minutes of data from when the plane took off from the airport and reached the Pentagon just before impact or passed the Pentagon.

    Yes the conclusion is the plane crashed if data just stopped, but the flight data places the plane in the wrong place and it missed the 5 light poles.


  • #368
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 25,874 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    King Mob wrote: »
    Ok, so then even that theory is out then.
    If the data had no errors, then that means that there can't be any missing data.
    So that means the flight could not have continued after the moment the data stopped.
    You'd said it's impossible that the data was manipulated. It can't have been corrupted by a crash later and extra data could not have just vanished.

    So the only conclusion that you can possibly reach using your own assertions is that the plane crashed at the Pentagon.

    Otherwise you have to conclude that the data is in error or it was edited, which also is incompatible with the conspiracy.

    You've painted yourself into a pretty silly corner here.

    Missing data is only the last two seconds. We have over 1 hour and 30 minutes of data from when the plane took off from the airport and reached the Pentagon just before impact or passed the Pentagon.
    And after?
    Where's the data from the flight away from the Pentagon?
    It can't be edited out.
    It can't be corrupted or missing cause you just said that the data has no errors or missing parts. Nor does the NTSB mention anything about any such data being missing or even existing. If such data existed, the NTSB would have seen some evidence for it and mentioned it, cause apparently they're not in on the conspiracy.

    So if the data can't have been edited or have magically vanished at just the right time, what else could it be?


  • #369
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 25,874 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    Yes the conclusion is the plane crashed if data just stopped, but the flight data places the plane in the wrong place and it missed the 5 light poles.
    Lol so it crashed at some point in those 2 seconds then?
    Where did it end up and where's the evidence for a second plane crash in Dc on 9/11?
    If the gap is less that 2 seconds that puts it very near the Pentagon if not right in it...


  • #370
    Cheerful Spring
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    King Mob wrote: »
    And after?
    Where's the data from the flight away from the Pentagon?
    It can't be edited out.
    It can't be corrupted or missing cause you just said that the data has no errors or missing parts. Nor does the NTSB mention anything about any such data being missing or even existing. If such data existed, the NTSB would have seen some evidence for it and mentioned it, cause apparently they're not in on the conspiracy.

    So if the data can't have been edited or have magically vanished at just the right time, what else could it be?

    Why would it be an error if you believe a plane crashed? Skeptics say on that forum once the plane impacted the Pentagon, the data did not have enough time to record, two seconds it got corrupted? I don't diagree with that explantation.

    Well i don't know i going to continue reading the thread to see if anyone contacted NSTB for why the last seconds are missing?


  • #371
    Cheerful Spring
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    King Mob wrote: »
    Lol so it crashed at some point in those 2 seconds then?
    Where did it end up and where's the evidence for a second plane crash in Dc on 9/11?
    If the gap is less that 2 seconds that puts it very near the Pentagon if not right in it...

    The discrepancy is the altitude Flight 77 was about 180 feet in the air near the highway, 2 seconds out from crashing, then the data stopped. At that altitude the plane was going over the Pentagon. I not pilot i don't know if you can't get the plane to come down to 20 feet or 30 feet in two seconds?


  • Advertisement
  • #372
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 25,874 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    Why would it be an error if you believe a plane crashed?
    Because I accept reality and believe the plane crashed into the Pentagon.

    If we are to believe your version, either the plane flew off after buzzing the Pentagon, flew for a long time then crashed for no reason, then by sheer luck and coincidence and against all possibility the crash perfectly erased all the data between its crash and when it flew over the Pentagon, and left no evidence for this and left the rest of the data perfectly intact and with no signs of error or corruption.

    Or

    The plane crashed in those two seconds only somehow not at the Pentagon and also that no one noticed a second plane crash in Dc on 9/11.

    Both of these options are impossible and silly, but that's what the conspiracy theorist must conclude according to you.

    Where do you think flight 77 crashed and when?


  • #373
    Cheerful Spring
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    King Mob wrote: »
    Because I accept reality and believe the plane crashed into the Pentagon.

    If we are to believe your version, either the plane flew off after buzzing the Pentagon, flew for a long time then crashed for no reason, then by sheer luck and coincidence and against all possibility the crash perfectly erased all the data between its crash and when it flew over the Pentagon, and left no evidence for this and left the rest of the data perfectly intact and with no signs of error or corruption.

    Or

    The plane crashed in those two seconds only somehow not at the Pentagon and also that no one noticed a second plane crash in Dc on 9/11.

    Both of these options are impossible and silly, but that's what the conspiracy theorist must conclude according to you.

    You can't think like that you have to prove the Flight 77 data is inaccurate. As the government claims this flight Data recorder was found in the wreckage of the Pentagon. You can't pick and choose the data points you like and don't like. Clearly, the FDR is showing a plane on approach to the Pentagon NE of where should be to take down 5 light poles. You have to tell me why this FDR data is inaccurate with verifiable sources that we check off.


  • #374
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 25,874 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    You can't think like that you have to prove the Flight 77 data is inaccurate. As the government claims this flight Data recorder was found in the wreckage of the Pentagon. You can't pick and choose the data points you like and don't like.
    So then flight 77 did crash at the Pentagon...?

    If not, where did it crash and when?

    If it's away from the pentagon, where's the data from after the plane flew over it?
    The only one picking and choosing reality here is you...


  • #375
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 25,874 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Hey so what happened to the idea that flight 77 went missing for 40 odd minutes so it could be replaced.

    Do you still claim this even though the flight recorder shows otherwise?


  • #376
    TheChizler
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,537 ✭✭✭TheChizler


    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    Why was the plane 180 feet in the air 2 seconds before impact?
    Your own screenshots show the altitude dropping from 597' to 180' in 5 seconds. Assuming a linear rate this a drop of 83 feet per second. If we do a linear extrapolation in the next two seconds your 180 foot drop is well accounted for, and we'll within the margin of error considering the low sampling rate and given I don't know where in those seconds the screenshots were taken.

    Of course this is assuming the pentagon ground floor is at 0 feet relative to the figure in the diagram, but that seems to be what you're claiming.


  • #377
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 25,874 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    TheChizler wrote: »
    Your own screenshots show the altitude dropping from 597' to 180' in 5 seconds. Assuming a linear rate this a drop of 83 feet per second. If we do a linear extrapolation in the next two seconds your 180 foot drop is well accounted for, and we'll within the margin of error considering the low sampling rate and given I don't know where in those seconds the screenshots were taken.

    Of course this is assuming the pentagon ground floor is at 0 feet relative to the figure in the diagram, but that seems to be what you're claiming.

    There's that pesky basic math ruining the conspiracy theory's fun again...


  • #378
    TheChizler
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,537 ✭✭✭TheChizler


    King Mob wrote: »
    There's that pesky basic math ruining the conspiracy theory's fun again...
    It's almost as if the theory hasn't been thought through fully...


  • #379
    Cheerful Spring
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    TheChizler wrote: »
    Your own screenshots show the altitude dropping from 597' to 180' in 5 seconds. Assuming a linear rate this a drop of 83 feet per second. If we do a linear extrapolation in the next two seconds your 180 foot drop is well accounted for, and we'll within the margin of error considering the low sampling rate and given I don't know where in those seconds the screenshots were taken.

    Of course this is assuming the pentagon ground floor is at 0 feet relative to the figure in the diagram, but that seems to be what you're claiming.

    Good spot how to work it out. Your wrong on numbers though

    9.42am it was 316 feet it dropped 242 feet hit 9.43am about 72 feet off.

    9.43 it was 242 feet it dropped to 180 feet at 9.44am and 62 feet off.

    So if working though those numbers

    Two seconds later
    9.45 it would at be at 132 feet 52 feet off.

    9.46 it would be at 92 feet 42 feet off.

    At 92 feet it flies over the Pentagon by 20 feet. Pentagon height 5 floors is 70 feet.


  • #380
    Cheerful Spring
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    King Mob wrote: »
    Hey so what happened to the idea that flight 77 went missing for 40 odd minutes so it could be replaced.

    Do you still claim this even though the flight recorder shows otherwise?

    In real time the plane went missing for 42 minutes. The Flight data recorder is evidence released 6 years later after 9/11 that reconstructed the plane flight path.


  • #381
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 25,874 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    In real time the plane went missing for 42 minutes. The Flight data recorder is evidence released 6 years later after 9/11 that reconstructed the plane flight path.
    So where does the flight recorder data indicate the plane was being replaced like your previous claim?
    Do you now accept that the flight was the same one that left the airport?


  • Advertisement
  • #382
    Cheerful Spring
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    King Mob wrote: »
    So where does the flight recorder data indicate the plane was being replaced like your previous claim?
    Do you now accept that the flight was the same one that left the airport?

    Well obviously a Flight recorder is not going to show another plane, in the area? Flight 77 data recorder is just evidence the plane didn't strike the Pentagon near the light poles.

    Yes of course i accept this is a plane that flew out of the airport, if the FDR is accurate.


  • #383
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 25,874 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    Well obviously a Flight recorder is not going to show another plane, in the area? Flight 77 data recorder is just evidence the plane didn't strike the Pentagon near the light poles.

    Yes of course i accept this is a plane that flew out of the airport, if the FDR is accurate.
    Ok, so you were lying earlier when you claimed that plane might have been replaced in those 42 minutes.
    And we now know that the plane was near the pentagon when the crash occured.

    So where do you think the plane went after the pentagon?
    Where's the Flight data for it continuing on after it flew over the pentagon and why did it stop suddenly there?

    And hang on, what's this "IF" ****?
    Are you now insinuating that the FDR might not be accurate now you've painted yourself into a corner?


  • #384
    banie01
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,055 ✭✭✭✭banie01


    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    Good spot how to work it out. Your wrong on numbers though

    9.42am it was 316 feet it dropped 242 feet hit 9.43am about 72 feet off.

    9.43 it was 242 feet it dropped to 180 feet at 9.44am and 62 feet off.

    So if working though those numbers

    Two seconds later
    9.45 it would at be at 132 feet 52 feet off.

    9.46 it would be at 92 feet 42 feet off.

    At 92 feet it flies over the Pentagon by 20 feet. Pentagon height 5 floors is 70 feet.

    Just on your point of the heights being off can I assume that you are measuring ASL?
    This is the standard for altitude measurement rather than relative to ground.

    Your argument regarding the height differential versus the FDR is reliant upon the height of the Pentagon ASL and not the relative height.

    Assuming the Pentagon is built on a surface 20ft ASL there is no issue with the height recorded on the FDR.


  • #385
    Cheerful Spring
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    King Mob wrote: »
    Ok, so you were lying earlier when you claimed that plane might have been replaced in those 42 minutes.
    And we now know that the plane was near the pentagon when the crash occured.

    So where do you think the plane went after the pentagon?
    Where's the Flight data for it continuing on after it flew over the pentagon and why did it stop suddenly there?

    How am i lying a flight recorder is not going to show us if another plane, a missile, or bomb caused the damage at the Pentagon?

    Yes, the plane was near the Pentagon, but even if I agreed with you it crashed there, the FDR places the plane NE of the Navy Annex. To knock down 5 light poles the plane has to be SW of the Navy Annex. You figure that out for me then we can talk!

    The C hole damage doesn't even make sense. If landing gear came through this hole. Why isn't this device shown outside the hole? This is the hole just after the crash.


    449290.png


  • #386
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 25,874 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    How am i lying a flight recorder is not going to show us if another plane, a missile, or bomb caused the damage at the Pentagon?
    Because previously you were claiming that the plane was replaced.
    Now, the corner you've painted yourself into does not allow for that.

    Now again,
    Where is the flight data of the plane flying away from the Pentagon?
    Why does it stop right at the Pentagon?
    Where did the plane go?

    If you don't know, please just admit that.


  • #387
    Cheerful Spring
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    King Mob wrote: »
    Because previously you were claiming that the plane was replaced.
    Now, the corner you've painted yourself into does not allow for that.

    Now again,
    Where is the flight data of the plane flying away from the Pentagon?
    Why does it stop right at the Pentagon?
    Where did the plane go?

    If you don't know, please just admit that.

    You're creating this in your head. I said another plane could hit the Pentagon. Could be missile or bomb could have gone off in the building. Of course, you ignored this thinking of mine. You preferred to think you caught me out in your own head.

    FDR data stopped two seconds before the crash, i have said this numerous times.


  • #388
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 25,874 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    FDR data stopped two seconds before the crash, i have said this numerous times.
    Ok.
    Why does it stop?
    Coincidence?
    Magic?


  • #389
    Cheerful Spring
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    King Mob wrote: »
    Ok.
    Why does it stop?
    Coincidence?
    Magic?

    Why don't you tell me why the C hole looks like a hollow blast charge? Why is the landing gear damage not shown outside the C hole? This entire thread you refused to answer a single question. Can you answer these two questions now?

    Contact the NTSB if you want the answer, question answered.


  • #390
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 25,874 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    Why don't you tell me why the C hole looks like a hollow blast charge? Why is the landing gear damage not shown outside the C hole? Just like this entire thread you refuse to answer a single question, i bet.
    Because, like every time you've tried to change the topic, it's a transparent attempt to deflect from the fact your conspiracy theory is silly.
    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    Contact the NTSB if you want the answer, question answered.
    They will tell me that the plane crashed into the pentagon.

    Why do you think it stopped?


  • Advertisement
  • #391
    Cheerful Spring
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    King Mob wrote: »
    Because, like every time you've tried to change the topic, it's a transparent attempt to deflect from the fact your conspiracy theory is silly.


    They will tell me that the plane crashed into the pentagon.

    Why do you think it stopped?

    I going to ignore you because you don't want to debate the evidence at all. If you're so confident in your belief you should be able to answer me.

    It not a deflection because the C hole is exit point for the wreckage of the plane. If landing gear from Flight 77 made this hole. What happened where is the wreckage outside the hole? Where did it go?


Advertisement