View Active Topics          Latest 100 Topics          View Your Posts          Switch to Mobile

Zero - An Investigation into 9/11 (Irrefutable, MUST SEE!)

Share or recommend interesting films and videos about paranormal phenomena, awakening topics, skepticism, spirituality, metaphysics, science, conspiracies, etc.

Re: Zero - An Investigation into 9/11 (Irrefutable, MUST SEE

Postby ProfWag » 21 Jun 2010, 20:57

Here's your pilot info:

I’ve been a pilot for the past 27 years, first in the Italian Air Force, and then as
a check Captain for an airline.
I have a good experience as a simulator instructor and examiner, (as a matter
of fact one of my jobs was to train people with very basic experience…), and I
flew NATO AWACS planes as an Aircraft Commander (air refueling qualified)
and maritime patrol airplanes very low over water.

In my opinion the official version of the fact is absolutely plausible, does not
require exceptional circumstances, bending of any law of physics or
superhuman capabilities. Like other (real pilots) have said, the manoeuvres
required of the hijackers were within their (very limited) capabilities, they
were performed without any degree of finesse and resulted in damage to the
targets only after desperate overmanoeuvring of the planes. The hijackers
took advantage of anything that might make their job easier, and decided not
to rely on their low piloting skills. It is misleading to make people believe
that the hijackers HAD to possess superior pilot skills to do what they did.
Giulio Bernacchia
giulioberna@tin.it


Here's a great web site that properly exams many of your claims.
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread79655/pg1
Some more info that's pretty hard to refute:

Human Identification in a Post-9/11 World: Attack on American
Airlines Flight 77 and the Pentagon
Identification and Pathology
Andrew M. Baker, M.D.
On September 11, 2001, American Airlines Flight 77 was hijacked by five terrorists as part of a
coordinated attack on the United States that also involved the hijackings of American Airlines
Flight 11 (which was flown into the North Tower of the World Trade Center), United Airlines
Flight 175 (which was flown into the South Tower of the World Trade Center), and United Airlines
Flight 93 (which crashed in a field in Shanksville, Pennsylvania). AA Flight 77 was intentionally
crashed into the Pentagon, killing all 64 people on board the aircraft (terrorists, flight crew, and
passengers) and 125 people (military and civilian) in the building. The fact that this was a terrorist
attack targeting the nerve center of the U.S. Department of Defense made the identification and
handling of the human remains significantly different than a “typical” mass disaster.
The responsibility to identify and autopsy each of the decedents fell to the Office of the Armed
Forces Medical Examiner, part of the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, headquartered in
Washington, DC. All of the human remains–of which there were more than 2000 separate
specimens–were moved to the U.S. Air Force Port Mortuary at Dover AFB, Delaware, for
evaluation. There, a multidisciplinary team of pathologists, dentists, anthropologists, fingerprint
specialists, radiologists, DNA technologists, photographers, morticians, and support personnel
used a systematic, stepwise approach to ensure that every scientifically available method was
utilized to maximize the number of victims that could be positively identified, reassociated, and
returned to the families.
This presentation will open with an overview of forensic human identification, discussing the
relative strengths and weaknesses of the various forms of presumptive and scientific human
identification and highlighting the contributions of dentistry, anthropology, fingerprinting, DNA,
and radiology. The presentation will then go inside the mortuary, showing every step in the
identification process and explaining the rationale for the identifications and examinations.
Following approximately 2½ weeks of remains processing and two months of DNA analysis, 183
unique identities were generated from the remains of those killed in the attack on the Pentagon,
yielding 178 positive identifications. Some remains for each of the terrorists were recovered, as
evidenced by five unique postmortem profiles that did not match any antemortem material
provided by victims’ families. No identifiable remains for five of the victims known to have been
killed in the attack were recovered.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54






Re: Zero - An Investigation into 9/11 (Irrefutable, MUST SEE

Postby Scepcop » 22 Jun 2010, 04:01

ProfWag wrote:Here's your pilot info:

I’ve been a pilot for the past 27 years, first in the Italian Air Force, and then as
a check Captain for an airline.
I have a good experience as a simulator instructor and examiner, (as a matter
of fact one of my jobs was to train people with very basic experience…), and I
flew NATO AWACS planes as an Aircraft Commander (air refueling qualified)
and maritime patrol airplanes very low over water.

In my opinion the official version of the fact is absolutely plausible, does not
require exceptional circumstances, bending of any law of physics or
superhuman capabilities. Like other (real pilots) have said, the manoeuvres
required of the hijackers were within their (very limited) capabilities, they
were performed without any degree of finesse and resulted in damage to the
targets only after desperate overmanoeuvring of the planes. The hijackers
took advantage of anything that might make their job easier, and decided not
to rely on their low piloting skills. It is misleading to make people believe
that the hijackers HAD to possess superior pilot skills to do what they did.
Giulio Bernacchia
giulioberna@tin.it


Thanks I'll email him. Where did you get the above from? Can you give me the link?
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: Zero - An Investigation into 9/11 (Irrefutable, MUST SEE

Postby ProfWag » 22 Jun 2010, 04:41

Scepcop wrote:
ProfWag wrote:Here's your pilot info:

I’ve been a pilot for the past 27 years, first in the Italian Air Force, and then as
a check Captain for an airline.
I have a good experience as a simulator instructor and examiner, (as a matter
of fact one of my jobs was to train people with very basic experience…), and I
flew NATO AWACS planes as an Aircraft Commander (air refueling qualified)
and maritime patrol airplanes very low over water.

In my opinion the official version of the fact is absolutely plausible, does not
require exceptional circumstances, bending of any law of physics or
superhuman capabilities. Like other (real pilots) have said, the manoeuvres
required of the hijackers were within their (very limited) capabilities, they
were performed without any degree of finesse and resulted in damage to the
targets only after desperate overmanoeuvring of the planes. The hijackers
took advantage of anything that might make their job easier, and decided not
to rely on their low piloting skills. It is misleading to make people believe
that the hijackers HAD to possess superior pilot skills to do what they did.
Giulio Bernacchia
giulioberna@tin.it


Thanks I'll email him. Where did you get the above from? Can you give me the link?

http://www.911myths.com/Another_Expert.pdf
http://www.911myths.com/html/giulio_bernacchia.html
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Zero - An Investigation into 9/11 (Irrefutable, MUST SEE

Postby ProfWag » 22 Jun 2010, 05:59

In all honesty, I have watched those videos before. They are one-sided and full of telling only half the story. They are well made, but that doesn't make them accurate. (See JFK...)
So, in an effort to debunk this movie, I decided I would watch the first minute of the first video that Scepcop posted. Here are my results:
16 seconds, the narater discussing Flight 77 said the plane crashed on land. That's false. The plane did not crash on land, it crashed into a building. A concrete, reinforced building unlike any other. DEBUNKED.
39 seconds into the movie, the dude said something about there being no tell-tail evidence of an airplane. That's false. There are tons of it.
Here is a link to a video that supports my statements:
http://www.youtube.com/user/RKOwens4#p/u/53/is_qBXqObes
So, I'm not even 40 seconds into it and I've found two false statements. Can you give me a more compelling reason to search any further? I doubt it...
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Zero - An Investigation into 9/11 (Irrefutable, MUST SEE

Postby NinjaPuppy » 23 Jun 2010, 06:14

SCEPCOP wrote:The film is very engaging and gripping. I'd love to hear Ninjapuppy's response to the clips as well.

My response??? WOW! The first two (#3 & #4) were riviting. It is by far some of the most thought provoking video I have seen on 9/11 to date. Video #5 was harder for me to follow
but 3 & 4 made complete sense and was easily understood.

Of course I have no answers because I am completely out of the loop when it comes to military protocol, physics or engineering but it sure did seem plain as day that there is no way that
you can make sense of what we were told as the 'true' story or findings.

I did have one thought on how an under trained pilot might crash a 757 into a building. It seems to me that you don't need any skill to crash a plane. I bet even I could do that. The only
explanation for this I could think of is the principle of dumb luck. Aim the nose toward Washington and let the invisible pieces of the plane land where they will.
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Re: Zero - An Investigation into 9/11 (Irrefutable, MUST SEE

Postby Scepcop » 23 Jun 2010, 20:37

ProfWag,
Check out this long list of pilot names and credentials. They are very impressive.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/core.html

Are you saying that these folks don't know what they're talking about? If there was no case for 9/11 Truth, why would so many intelligent rational professionals challenge or doubt the official story, which you consider to be Gospel truth?
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: Zero - An Investigation into 9/11 (Irrefutable, MUST SEE

Postby Scepcop » 23 Jun 2010, 21:29

ProfWag,

This is as QUALIFIED as it gets!

This guy is as qualified and experienced as it gets when it comes to flying. This is NOT some crackpot conspiracy theorist, but a TRAINED PROFESSIONAL with a long prestigious career in the US Navy and commercial Airline industry.

Commander Ralph Kolstad, U.S. Navy (ret) – Retired commercial airline captain with 27 years experience. Aircraft flown: Boeing 727, 757 and 767, McDonnell Douglas MD-80, and Fokker F-100. Retired fighter pilot. Former Air Combat Instructor, U.S. Navy Fighter Weapons School (Topgun). 20-year Navy career. Aircraft flown: McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom, Douglas A-4 Skyhawk, and Grumman F-14 Tomcat. 23,000+ total hours flown.

Listen to his interview with Kevin Barrett about the 767's flying into the WTC at 500 knots on 9/11. It's very revealing.

http://noliesradio.org/archives/FB20090 ... ad_web.mp3

In the first half of the interview, Kolstad explains why flying a 767 into the WTC isn't as easy as you think. You can't just point the plane at the towers. Steering an airliner is very tricky, especially at sea level. The aerodynamics are more complicated than people assume.

A 767 can only do 500 knots in two scenarios - at cruising altitude (above the clouds), or in a straight nose dive. If you were at the altitute of the WTC, you cannot do 500 knots on a 767. And if you pulled the throttle at full speed at that altitude, you'd lose control of the plane and could not even steer it. That's true even if you're the best pilot in the world.

Hitting a target he explains, especially a narrow one like the WTC, is very difficult and only achievable when you come in at LANDING SPEED, not at full throttle like the hijackers did.

In fact, he saw highly trained professional pilots in flight simulators try to hit the WTC and ALL of them failed. They were only able to hit it when they came in at landing speed. (which is NOT the speed that the 9/11 hijackers came under)

Most astonishing of all, he said that HE HIMSELF COULD NOT HAVE FLOWN those 767's into the WTC like the hijackers did on 9/11, despite all his vast experience, training and skill!!!!!!

Imagine that! That says A LOT.

As to how the planes on 9/11 hit the WTC, he admits he does not know the answer and does not like to speculate. To say that it was a military plane disguised as a 767 or a remote controlled jet, or whatever, would be speculating and he does not want to go there. All he knows for sure, he says, is that a trained professional pilot in a 767 flying 500 knots at sea level would NOT be able to hit the WTC, for various reasons. Anything else is purely speculative.

Now if one of the most experienced and qualified pilots in the world is saying this, that really does mean something. This is NOT some crackpot conspiracy theorist, but a TRAINED PROFESSIONAL with a long prestigious career in the US Navy and commercial Airline industry.

He also gives us some insight into what other airline pilots he's talked to thinks about the whole thing, and how many would rather not even talk about it at all.

And he said that most debunkers on the internet are not qualified to know what they are talking about (you know who you are).

Listen to the interview here:

http://noliesradio.org/archives/FB20090 ... ad_web.mp3

See Kolstad's official statements and qualifications here:

http://www.patriotsquestion911.com/pilots.html
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: Zero - An Investigation into 9/11 (Irrefutable, MUST SEE

Postby ProfWag » 23 Jun 2010, 23:36

There are 271,584 commercial and airline transport pilots in the United States alone. You came up with one guy who says it's not possible.
Pilots for Truth lists a total of 200,000 hours of flight time (I'm not going to handcount how many pilots actually are members). Using the average of 2,000 hours of flight time for commercial pilots, that's about 100 members. So......you are asking me to believe something that only .0003% of the pilots believe. Would you believe ANYTHING that less than 1% of an expert population believed? I wouldn't. I saw video of the airplanes crashing into the WTC. One is going to have to provide a little more credible evidence than that...
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Zero - An Investigation into 9/11 (Irrefutable, MUST SEE

Postby Scepcop » 24 Jun 2010, 01:05

ProfWag wrote:There are 271,584 commercial and airline transport pilots in the United States alone. You came up with one guy who says it's not possible.
Pilots for Truth lists a total of 200,000 hours of flight time (I'm not going to handcount how many pilots actually are members). Using the average of 2,000 hours of flight time for commercial pilots, that's about 100 members. So......you are asking me to believe something that only .0003% of the pilots believe. Would you believe ANYTHING that less than 1% of an expert population believed? I wouldn't. I saw video of the airplanes crashing into the WTC. One is going to have to provide a little more credible evidence than that...


Dude, polls show that most Americans believe there is a cover up of some kind. Most do not sign online petitions or websites. There are many more pilots who challenge the official story too. But they don't wish to go public with it. It could cost them their job.

I guarantee you that if the films I mentioned were shown nationwide in the US, those sites would be getting A LOT more signatures.

Can you explain to me how, if a 767 at full throttle at the altitude of the WTC would lose control, as Kolstad explains (bet you didn't listen to it), how the hijackers managed to do it?

Also, if Commander Kolstad could not hit the WTC in a 767 like the hijackers did, then how did the hijackers do it? Explain that one!
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: Zero - An Investigation into 9/11 (Irrefutable, MUST SEE

Postby ProfWag » 24 Jun 2010, 01:59

Scepcop wrote:Also, if Commander Kolstad could not hit the WTC in a 767 like the hijackers did, then how did the hijackers do it? Explain that one!

So that was an optical illusion that planes crashed into the WTC?
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Zero - An Investigation into 9/11 (Irrefutable, MUST SEE

Postby ProfWag » 24 Jun 2010, 02:23

Scepcop wrote:
Also, if Commander Kolstad could not hit the WTC in a 767 like the hijackers did, then how did the hijackers do it? Explain that one!

I probably should have answered this better rather than my optical illusion statement. It sounds like Commander Kolstad wasn't a very good pilot.
But, I'll tell you what, show me compelling evidence that those planes didn't fly into the Pentagon and I'll give it another lookover. Otherwise, whether Commandere Kolstad could do it or not is not very substantial evidence that the commercial airliners didn't crash into the WTC.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Zero - An Investigation into 9/11 (Irrefutable, MUST SEE

Postby Scepcop » 27 Jun 2010, 18:02

ProfWag,

I don't get something. First, see these clips from the film:






1. Ok so why did the FBI ignore numerous warnings from its own agents and leads just before 9/11 that terrorist attacks were imminent?

2. Why did the hijackers get visas into the US so easily? And why was the US consulate agent told not to talk about the visas given to the hijackers or report it?

3. And why was Bin Laden's family safely flown out of the US when OBL was public enemy number one?

This YouTuber put it eloquently:

"funny thing,Bush demands that all leaders of Al-Qaeda be handed over to the US
yet they have Bin Laden's family in the US,flown off after 9/11
the only way they could receive any info on Osama was by his family,yet they were flown out of the country,away from Surveillance.
instead of being under protected custody and Surveillance by the government,they are flown to safety overseas
wow,either the government is really stupid or they are hiding something"

How come the mainstream media is too chickenshit and controlled to cover all this?
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: Zero - An Investigation into 9/11 (Irrefutable, MUST SEE

Postby Scepcop » 27 Jun 2010, 18:05

ProfWag wrote:
Scepcop wrote:Also, if Commander Kolstad could not hit the WTC in a 767 like the hijackers did, then how did the hijackers do it? Explain that one!

So that was an optical illusion that planes crashed into the WTC?


I don't know. And neither does Kolstad. Maybe it was a military plane or drone?

Did you ever consider that?

Some witnesses said the plane was too grey to be a commercial airline.

How come you always ask other people to consider the possibility that there are no conspiracies and no paranormal phenomena, yet that is the ONLY possibility that you consider? lol How ironic.
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: Zero - An Investigation into 9/11 (Irrefutable, MUST SEE

Postby Scepcop » 27 Jun 2010, 18:09

ProfWag wrote:
Scepcop wrote:
Also, if Commander Kolstad could not hit the WTC in a 767 like the hijackers did, then how did the hijackers do it? Explain that one!

I probably should have answered this better rather than my optical illusion statement. It sounds like Commander Kolstad wasn't a very good pilot.
But, I'll tell you what, show me compelling evidence that those planes didn't fly into the Pentagon and I'll give it another lookover. Otherwise, whether Commandere Kolstad could do it or not is not very substantial evidence that the commercial airliners didn't crash into the WTC.


Obviously he is a VERY good pilot. Look at his credentials:

Commander Ralph Kolstad, U.S. Navy (ret) – Retired commercial airline captain with 27 years experience. Aircraft flown: Boeing 727, 757 and 767, McDonnell Douglas MD-80, and Fokker F-100. Retired fighter pilot. Former Air Combat Instructor, U.S. Navy Fighter Weapons School (Topgun). 20-year Navy career. Aircraft flown: McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom, Douglas A-4 Skyhawk, and Grumman F-14 Tomcat. 23,000+ total hours flown.

There are many others too.

Bottom line: Kolstad is an AUTHORITY on this subject, and knows WAY more than YOU or I. He knows the facts. He says that people like you don't know what they're talking about and aren't qualified.

So answer my question: How could the hijackers do something that expert pilots could not?
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: Zero - An Investigation into 9/11 (Irrefutable, MUST SEE

Postby ProfWag » 27 Jun 2010, 19:27

Scepcop wrote:So answer my question: How could the hijackers do something that expert pilots could not?


Did you forget about the expert pilot reference I gave you that said it was very feasible? We have two expert pilots, your reference who says he doesn't see how they could have done it and my reference who says they most certainly could have done it. Why do you believe one over another?
I'll reiterate what I said earlier. There are over 200,000 commercial pilots in the US alone. If it was impossible for these guys to have flown those planes into buildings, why aren't they all speaking out? Sure, you've got less than .0003% of these guys who question the official story, but even then, they're not saying it was impossible for the hijackers to have done it.
Remember Winston, these guys were not expert pilots, but they had been trained well enough to have done what they did. I have provided references already that show the 757 did have the capabilities to do the maneuvers it did.
Here is something irrefutable (to borrow your phrase): If you say that military planes flew into the buildings, then you're saying that pilots could do it which contradicts your "expert" pilot's comments. The only way your story holds up that pilots could not have done it is if those were drones that flew into the building. And if you say that, then you're saying that 4 planes full of passengers were diverted somewhere else and these hijackers had to have then been able to land a plane. And if they landed the plane, then you have to provide evidence for what happend to the passengers on the plane. Explain that, Hero.
So, I've answered your question and unless you can provide evidence for what happened to those 4 planes other than they crashed into buildings/field, then your theory doesn't hold a drop of water.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

PreviousNext

Return to Share Interesting Videos and Films

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 2 guests

cron