Frequently Dumb Theories - A 9/11 written document I'm doing

[MarkyX]

You know FAQs? I'm doing a FDT for 9/11.

All I need is some people to slap in a theory or two, and perhaps a source. I'll deal with the answers (although if it's somewhat complex, post it here).

So if you have any theories that are commonly bought in message boards by idiots, post it here and I may add it to the list.

Pictures will also do.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Oh gawd...

Where to begin?

If you're dealing with idiots, Spooked911 is an obvious place to start. While his theories themselves are no less stupid than the rest, his experiments are absolutely retarded.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=56836&mesg_id=56836

http://covertoperations.blogspot.com/2006/07/flight-simulator-modeling-part-2.html

[MarkyX]

I'm looking for ones that are commonly used in message boards and debates. I don't care about KillTown's 200 lists or anything.

It needs to be common, not off the wall that even the deniers themselves think is stupid.

Here is an example

Some of the hijackers are still alive!

This is based on a BBC report on September 23, 2001. We are in the 2006, and much information has been gathered since then. Some of the hijackers listed on the BBC are simple mistaken identifications. Not every Arab name is unique, just like they are many "Marks" and "Michaels" in Western Societies.

In 2002, the Saudi Arabia embassy confirmed that 15 of the 19 hijackers were indeed Saudis and their families have been notified.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2002/02/06/saudi.htm

No one else has reported that the hijackers are still alive ever since that report. You think they would take the opportunity to destroy the official story and make the United States look like fools.

http://www.911myths.com/html/still_alive.html

[kookbreaker]

"It looks like demolition?"

"Why is the hole at the Pentagon too small?"

"Give me another building that collapsed from fire...no..that one doesn't count!"

"Squibs!"

[kookbreaker]

Is this a duplication of what 911myths covers or what?

[MarkyX]

Is this a duplication of what 911myths covers or what?

Somewhat. It's supposed to be a very quick breakdown instead of reading twenty sources about it. A summary if you will.

It's more focused on what's being talked about in message boards instead of just general theories though. I'm not trying to oust Mike here, but it's something I want to slap into 9/11 Deniers when they bring a stupid subject up. Not a lot of people bring up Barbara Olsen or the hijackers being trained by the government, but they sure like to bring up that "explosive quotes" often or the hijackings being alive.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

The claim that the FBI is no longer seeking Osama Bin Laden for 9-11.

The nutters repeat it often but when asked where the FBI said "We no longer consider OBL a suspect in 9-11" they never deliver.

[Bronze Dog]

I'd like to know more about the dumptruck(s) full of gold. :D

[MarkyX]

The claim that the FBI is no longer seeking Osama Bin Laden for 9-11.

The nutters repeat it often but when asked where the FBI said "We no longer consider OBL a suspect in 9-11" they never deliver.

Going to need more info on that on. Any press releases?

[Joytown]

Just off the top of my head:

1) WTC 1 2 and 7 all fell faster than "free fall"

2) There were no "hot enough to melt steel", raging fires in the WTC towers 1 & 2 - usually accompanied with the shot of that poor lady standing in the gaping hole where the plane went in - ignoring that fact that a wide shot would show huge fires all around her and that no-one says that the steel melted.

3) How can 19 Hijackers with boxcutters defeat the largest, most expensive defense organization in the world.

4) There's no proof of a 757 at the Pentagon. You could play golf on the lawn in front of the raging fires!

5) The PEntagon is the most heavily defended building the the world, and had operational air defense batteries protecting it on 9/11.

6) No way Hani Hanjour could have made the manouvers he made and hit the Pentagon in the exact spot he hit it - right where they just completed upgrading the building!

[Bronze Dog]

1) WTC 1 2 and 7 all fell faster than "free fall"
Because we all know every bit of rubble had a gyro stabilized rocket thruster adding downward acceleration attached to it. ;)

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Going to need more info on that on. Any press releases?

That's just it... there aren't any!


The nutters base this claim on two minor facts; some FBI guy said something about not having sufficient evidence against Bin Laden and OBLs wanted poster makes no mention of 9-11.

From this they get "FBI sez Bin Laden didn't do 9-11".

[gumboot]

6) No way Hani Hanjour could have made the manouvers he made and hit the Pentagon in the exact spot he hit it - right where they just completed upgrading the building!


As an add on to that, the common claim that the section that was hit was "under construction" and only construction workers were killed.

A brief glance over the ranks of those killed will quickly dispell this myth... this section had been completely renovated and was fully occupied.

-Andrew

[MikeW]

I'm not trying to oust Mike here
s'okay, more formats, presentations and styles we have, the better!

[defaultdotxbe]

one that has been particularly annoying me of late:

"we're the skeptics"

not really a "theory," per se, but its soemthing they commonly throw out

am i wrong is assuming a skeptic should be considerate of all possibilities? Cters never consider the notion that they might be wrong, i brought this up at the LC boards (asking how they would react to a second investigation that upheld the conclusions of the first) and must have hit a nerve, not only was i suspended but the whole thread was removed

anyone who disagrees with them is automatically a sheep, shill or short sighted....but THEY'RE the skeptics

[Brainster]

The official story is a conspiracy theory!

Why were there so few people on the planes?

The cellphone calls could not have been made.

[Joytown]

The WTC Towers fell symmetically into neat little piles in their own footprints.

[MarkyX]

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=4EO3SJ2G

This is what I have so far. In PDF format.

[defaultdotxbe]

mirrored, because things like megaupload piss me off:

http://xbehome.com/screwloosechange/pictures/DumbMoronsPart1.pdf

[Blue Mountain]

Minor nit in an otherwise excellent document:


The steel framed McCormick Center was at the time the World's largest exhibition center. It like the WTC used long steel trusses to create a large open space without columns. Those trusses were unprotected but of course the WTC lost it's fire protection due to the impacts.
(It's/its mixup)

[tacodaemon]

You've definitely got to get "pools of molten metal" vs. "pools of molten steel" in there. But check up on these CT'er references (http://stopthelie.com/references.html).

[gumboot]

Ooooh...

You're missing one...

"Multiple wargames caused NORAD to stand down"

False! There was a real-world operation called "Operation Northern Vigilance" which involved moving aircraft to Alaska and Canada to keep an eye on a major Russian long-range bomber exercise in Siberia.

There was also a NORAD sponsored yearly exercise called "Guardian" consisting of two CPXs (Command Post Exercises) - US Space Command ("Vigilant Guardian") and US Strategic Command ("Global Guardian"). This exercise did not involve any operational units, however it did mean all command post staff were at their desks when the hijackings occured, resulting in a rapid transition from exercise to real-world.

Neither the Guardian Exercises nor Operation Northern Vigilance involved the 14 fighter aircraft rostered for Armed Alert Station duty across the Continental USA.

-Andrew

[Class]

Pentagon security gate camera does not show a 757

Hole in Shanksville is too small for a 757 to have crashed there

President Bush stayed in the school in Florida instead of being evacuated by the Secret Service because he knew about 9/11

Larry Silverstein admitting on national television to have "pulled" WTC 7

President Bush admitted to seeing first plane crash into WTC live before going into Florida classroom

[kookbreaker]

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=4EO3SJ2G

This is what I have so far. In PDF format.

You might want to name the 'High Rise in Philadelphia' it was the Meridian Plaza.

[MustangGT]

Bumble Planes?

:D

[eeyore1954]

Picture of WTC with top 10 percent diagrammed saying this had to crush this (rest of tower) in 13 seconds If you are not sure of what i mean ( although I would suspect you have seen it) See the picture in Loose change debating forum post by Jenabell on Aug 11 2006, 12:08 AM in pancake theory dead to rights. As if it would be physically impossible without explosives. This diagram bothers me because people look at it and think gee maybe that is true.

I should link them to a video of one domino knocking over 1000 saying this (a picture of a domino) did this. even though the analogy has some faults.

[Johnny Pixels]

Picture of WTC with top 10 percent diagrammed saying this had to crush this (rest of tower) in 13 seconds If you are not sure of what i mean ( although I would suspect you have seen it) See the picture in Loose change debating forum post by Jenabell on Aug 11 2006, 12:08 AM in pancake theory dead to rights. As if it would be physically impossible without explosives. This diagram bothers me because people look at it and think gee maybe that is true.

I should link them to a video of one domino knocking over 1000 saying this (a picture of a domino) did this. even though the analogy has some faults.

http://img74.imageshack.us/img74/3503/wtcnorthfull1eq.jpg

Welcome to the forum eeyore, I've read some of your posts over at the LC forums, hopefully you'll find more logic and less, well, rubbish here.

[chipmunk stew]

Norman Mineta testified that Dick Cheney gave an order not to shoot down flight 77 as it approached the Pentagon.


The truth: Mineta testified that he overheard a conversation between Cheney and a young man, in which the young man was giving updates on a plane's approach. The young man asked Cheney, "Does the order still stand?" Cheney responded affirmatively.

Mineta made the assumption that the plane was flight 77 and that the order was a shoot down order.

CTers make the assumption that the plane was flight 77 and that the order was a do not shoot down order.

[MarkyX]

Anyone got a good scientist site talking about the molten metal in the WTC?

And I saw the picture in the Usual Suspects where Osama is writing with his right hand, where can I find that?

[MarkyX]

Norman Mineta testified that Dick Cheney gave an order not to shoot down flight 77 as it approached the Pentagon.


The truth: Mineta testified that he overheard a conversation between Cheney and a young man, in which the young man was giving updates on a plane's approach. The young man asked Cheney, "Does the order still stand?" Cheney responded affirmatively.

Mineta made the assumption that the plane was flight 77 and that the order was a shoot down order.

CTers make the assumption that the plane was flight 77 and that the order was a do not shoot down order.

I'm giong to need hard evidence for this one. Got a link to the Mineta assuming it was a shoot down?

[MikeW]

And I saw the picture in the Usual Suspects where Osama is writing with his right hand, where can I find that?

I've a picture at http://www.911myths.com/html/bin_ladin_right_handed_.html , plus a smaller clip to download if you like.

[MarkyX]

It wasn't specifically that one, it was just a picture. It is shown before that small clip in The Usual Suspects

EDIT: Nevermind, screenscapped instead. Hopefully it's clear enough.

[negativ]

WTC owner had gazillion dollar insurance policy

Mark Bingham isn't on the Filght 93 manifest

Phonecalls were faked

Flight 93 landed in Ohio

PNAC

Bush simultaneously evil genius criminal mastermind, and bumbling inept moron dumber than box of hammers

[chipmunk stew]

I'm giong to need hard evidence for this one. Got a link to the Mineta assuming it was a shoot down?
From http://www.9-11commission.gov/archive/hearing2/9-11Commission_Hearing_2003-05-23.htm#panel_one


MR. MINETA: No, I was not. I was made aware of it during the time that the airplane coming into the Pentagon. There was a young man who had come in and said to the vice president, "The plane is 50 miles out. The plane is 30 miles out." And when it got down to, "The plane is 10 miles out," the young man also said to the vice president, "Do the orders still stand?" And the vice president turned and whipped his neck around and said, "Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?" Well, at the time I didn't know what all that meant. And --

MR. HAMILTON: The flight you're referring to is the --

MR. MINETA: The flight that came into the Pentagon.

MR. HAMILTON: The Pentagon, yeah.

MR. MINETA: And so I was not aware that that discussion had already taken place. But in listening to the conversation between the young man and the vice president, then at the time I didn't really recognize the significance of that.
And then later I heard of the fact that the airplanes had been scrambled from Langley to come up to DC, but those planes were still about 10 minutes away. And so then, at the time we heard about the airplane that went into Pennsylvania, then I thought, "Oh, my God, did we shoot it down?" And then we had to, with the vice president, go through the Pentagon to check that out.

MR. HAMILTON: Let me see if I understand. The plane that was headed toward the Pentagon and was some miles away, there was an order to shoot that plane down.

MR. MINETA: Well, I don't know that specifically, but I do know that the airplanes were scrambled from Langley or from Norfolk, the Norfolk area. But I did not know about the orders specifically other than listening to that other conversation.

MR. HAMILTON: But there very clearly was an order to shoot commercial aircraft down.

MR. MINETA: Subsequently I found that out.

[MarkyX]

http://lol.chroniclesofgaras.com/FrequentlyDumbTheories-D1.pdf

Updated

[Legalduck]

Thermite was used to bring down the WTC (and associated BS such that thermite is an explosive) ...OR that the WTC was constructed using explosives as building materials (C4 mixed with concrete or wrapped around the supports). I can't remember if it was geggy or christophera who proposed that one. I'm too lazy to look.

[MarkyX]

Okay, need some good information on the wargames, from official sources and the timeline for each one.

[Kent1]

http://lol.chroniclesofgaras.com/FrequentlyDumbTheories-D1.pdf

Updated
One possible error, Jones believes that SUPER-thermite was used. Super-thermite explodes.
(I've never seen this in action of cource, but thats the claim.)
He explains some of his ideas here
http://mp3.rbnlive.com/Fetzer/0608/20060810_Thu_Fetzer2.mp3

You'll here some other crappy myths in this audio file. The Michael Chertoff myth etc.....

[MarkyX]

Going to need some help with Flight 93. It's probably my weakest one.

Does anyone know some good 'common theories' and answers to them? Anything will do.

[T.A.M.]

Pulverized Concrete prior to complete colapse = Controlled Demolition. This one always rots me.

[MarkyX]

Can anyone give good information on the Molten "steel" after a few weeks ?

[MarkyX]

Bump

[Joytown]

Can anyone give good information on the Molten "steel" after a few weeks ?

Hey Marky -

what exactly are you looking for? Evidence it was there? COmments that there was something molton down there (or not?)

Not sure if this is what you are after but:

http://www.mazzocchiwrecking.com/wtc.htm

WORLD TRADE CENTER
Project:
Clean up the World Trade Center site.

Challenges:
The challenges at the World Trade Center were the extreme conditions, both emotional and physical.

The emotional challenge was to overcome the shock, the sense of mass destruction, and the loss of life. The knowledge that, in the first weeks, we were there not to just clean up, but to search for victims.

The physical challenge was the sheer magnitude of the project and its components. A beam 30 feet long and 8 feet wide weighed between 60 and 80 tons—steel so heavy it broke grapples and twisted booms. With ground temperatures reaching in excess of 1,200°F, steel beams were pulled out of the wreckage glowing red.

[gumboot]

Going to need some help with Flight 93. It's probably my weakest one.

Does anyone know some good 'common theories' and answers to them? Anything will do.


Let's see: "Wreckage was spread over 8 square miles, meaning the aircraft broke up in midair"

-Andrew

[gumboot]

Okay, need some good information on the wargames, from official sources and the timeline for each one.


Hmm... this could be tricky. I've not actually found any accurate sources... my information was "built" from a variety of different sources...

The various operations and exercises on and around 9/11 also have different names, and people get them mixed up, thus creating additional exercise names that don't actually exist.

As far as I know NORAD was only involved in one exercise on 9/11.

-Andrew

[Foolmewunz]

For the molten metal see 911 Myths - great stuff in the regular sections and then a terrific bit of science-ese from Greening (in the "Other Contributors" section). ((I'm a newbie and not yet able to post links and don't want to get yelled at by a mod.)) but they'd be at ..... the 911 myths site at the following extensions:
html/wtc_molten_steel.html and
/WTCTHERM.pdf

For topics... Most of the "Foreknowledge" BS

Not solely the CT-ers, but everyone around the water cooler still believes the stock market action on UA and AA stock. (Mysterious massive number of put orders that prove to be statistically normal and/or very easily explained.)

4000 Israelis didn't show up for work
SMS messages that warned people to get out 2 hours earlier than attack
All the important folks who didn't get on planes that day

[Kent1]

Can anyone give good information on the Molten "steel" after a few weeks ?

This one doesn't have a simple answer.


I can start you with Thomas Cahill
http://www.newsreview.com/sacramento/Content?oid=oid%3A65238

Cahill arrived at Ground Zero weeks after the reports of molten metal at the scene, but his extensive research on why the rubble piles smoldered so long was of interest to controlled-demolition theorists, who believed molten steel in the bottom of the piles provided the heat source. Such was not the case, Cahill said. Instead, fuel oil from the WTC’s generators seeped into the ground, ignited and slowly consumed the debris stacked on top of it. As the piles were peeled open, oxygen stoked the underground fire, which burned for weeks.


The longer answer...from a few sources.
A. Steel can melt with the addition of sulfer at 1000C or less
(You get slag)
http://www.me.wpi.edu/MTE/People/imsm.html
(The sulfer can come from gyp wallboard, heating fuel or acid rain)
I have more sources and interviews if needed

B. Smaller parts of steel can melt at around and below 1300C
http://www.atslab.com/fire/PDF/MeltedSteel.pdf

C. Its easy to have the appearance of melted steel but its just oxidized.

http://66.218.69.11/search/cache?p=melted+steel+house+fire&prssweb=Search&ei=UTF-8&fr=FP-tab-web-t&u=www.atslab.com/fire/PDF/IndicatorsOfTrouble.pdf&w=melted+steel+house+fire&d=ED93WzmtNBh2&icp=1&.intl=us

A study of the 1991 Oakland fire that burned 3,000 homes
revealed the presence of melted copper in over 80% of the burned structures, and what appeared to be melted steel in over 90% of the burned structures. With respect to steel, looks can be deceiving. What appears to be melted may be merely oxidized.

http://www.muskogeephoenix.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051130/NEWS01/511300303/1002
House files often have claims of melted or pools of steel
The house where Ingle said she grew up has burned into a rubble of broken bricks and pools of melted aluminum, plastic and steel.

D. Steel could of melted in the rumble pile beacuse it was insulated
The debris pile sat cooking for weeks, with the materials at the bottom of the pile getting incresingly hot beacuse the fires were confined and lost minimal heat to the atmosphere. As a result the fires could have easily reached temps sufficient to melt steel, not to mention most other metals found in the buildings.
(Debunking 9/11 myths page 41 Jon Magnusson)

E. Working on other steel reactions in the pile. (The Iron Burns research)
http://www.debunking911.com/ironburns.htm

F. Other metals are often mistaken to be steel

For example I have video of molten metal in the basement that is clearly a melted hubcap from a car.
http://www.terrorize.dk/911/magic/911.wtc.down.under.php
Click on WTC Three Floors Under

[MarkyX]

What about the information on Molten Steel at other WTCs? I heard they were some at WTC 6 and 5.

[Kent1]

What about the information on Molten Steel at other WTCs? I heard they were some at WTC 6 and 5.

I don't know of any "steel", but I know of two sources regarding metal
Mike has them listed at the bottom
http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc_molten_steel.html

[MarkyX]

Molten steel done, Insider trading done..

Only thing left is NORAD wargames and Flight 93. These are my weakest points.

So if you have a common theory and the answer to them, post em.

[MarkyX]

Forgot to add laws talking about private property (evidence releasing) and confessions that cannot be used in court.

[MarkyX]

New version

http://lol.chroniclesofgaras.com/FST.pdf

Need feedback and the information I've mentioned above.

EDIT: Added a sexy title page.

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Thermite was used to bring down the WTC (and associated BS such that thermite is an explosive) ...OR that the WTC was constructed using explosives as building materials (C4 mixed with concrete or wrapped around the supports). I can't remember if it was geggy or christophera who proposed that one. I'm too lazy to look.

I agree that thermite was not used intentionally, but I do not agree that is can not be explosive, in fact when mixed at high enough speeds by a specific type of energy it is very explosive.

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Aluminum Does not Burn, Thermite can not form Naturally, Thermite can not be explosive, Steel does not burn, Sulfur does not eat away steel! do those work the ones By Dr. Steven Jones?

They were always the Dumbest that I ever heard!

[Brainache]

Hey MarkyX
I hate being a pedant (but I am stuck with it. Genetic, perhaps?), so I have resisted posting about this for a while, but there is a slight spelling error in your opening paragraph.
"...suites their purpose." I think it should be "suits their purpose".
It is just the kind of petty mistake that some will pick you up on and try to use to your discredit.
I think I saw a few others further down as well, but I leave it to other pedants to find them.
Apart from these trivial things I think you have created a great document there.
Cheers.
Andy.

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Aluminum Does not Burn, Thermite can not form Naturally, Thermite can not be explosive, Steel does not burn, Sulfur does not eat away steel! do those work the ones By Dr. Steven Jones?

They were always the Dumbest that I ever heard!

Um, who, or what, are you quoting?

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Um, who, or what, are you quoting?

Sorry I was Quoting the work of Dr. Steven Jones, BYU the physicist.
Wrong on all accounts.

My eyes are bothering me, so it is hard to see and type.

It should have been like this.

Aluminum Does not Burn, Thermite can not form Naturally, Thermite can not be explosive, Steel does not burn, Sulfur does not eat away steel!
By Dr. Steven Jones?

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Sorry I was Quoting the work of Dr. Steven Jones, BYU the physicist.
Wrong on all accounts.

My eyes are bothering me, so it is hard to see and type.

It should have been like this.


By Dr. Steven Jones?

Copy. Thanks for the clarification.

[MarkyX]

Hey MarkyX
I hate being a pedant (but I am stuck with it. Genetic, perhaps?), so I have resisted posting about this for a while, but there is a slight spelling error in your opening paragraph.
"...suites their purpose." I think it should be "suits their purpose".
It is just the kind of petty mistake that some will pick you up on and try to use to your discredit.
I think I saw a few others further down as well, but I leave it to other pedants to find them.
Apart from these trivial things I think you have created a great document there.
Cheers.
Andy.

BE PEDEANT

If there is one thing I haven't been getting enough, it's feedback and pointing out how I am slaughtering the english language with each sentence I type.

[gumboot]

Just another to add - one of the early ones I was exposed to. You could have quite probably already included it - dont have time to check your pdf at the moment.

CLAIM:

Investigators were not allowed on site at ground zero until after all the steel had been shipped off to China for recycling. Thus there was no steel available for investigation.

-Andrew

[Cuddles]

Page 7 : This section worries me a little. Having said that CTers tend to attack the source instead of what the source says, you then go on to attack the source. While everything you say is entirely true it does sound a little hypocritical.

Page 9 : In paragraph 2, "...It like the WTC used..." should read "It, like the WTC, used...". I think paragraph 3 should be brown as it appears to be a quote.

Page 10 : Last paragraph of the quote says "I equate it to the building cowing down" which I assume should be "coming down".

Page 18 : The title says "instead it fell straight down" which should probably be "they fell straight down".

Page 20 : The section on "squibs" doesn't mention that a controled demo will set off explosives before the building falls over, rather than during the collapse when the "squins" are seen.

Page 23 : The phrase "Last but not lead..." is presumably meant to be "Last but not least...". Or a really bad pun. :p

Page 27 : Paragraph one says "...(And there may be rubble below that, and the building may be intact higher higher up)...". Too many highers.

Didn't notice anything else. You call 47 pages a quick breakdown?:eek:

Edit : Maybe I should chek my own spelling occasionally.

[Bronze Dog]

Page 27 : Paragraph one says "...(And there may be rubble below that, and the building may be intact higher higher up)...". Too many highers.

Make the pie higher.

[Mancman]

A very oft touted rubbish theory is that the WTC2 top section could only fall through the intact section below (rather than toppling straight over, into the streets) is if the core was destroyed by explosives, thereby removing the resistance and allowing the top section to fall through. Unfortunately for them, it's an absolute non starter, since an enormous 70 storey section of the core stood momentarily after the main collapse. (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1615521411849861778&q=wtc+7+collapse)

[MarkyX]

Bump

[MarkyX]

By the way, anyone have any site that I can point to that people who arrived late to a flight does not record them on the flight manifest (mark bingham)

[Kent1]

By the way, anyone have any site that I can point to that people who arrived late to a flight does not record them on the flight manifest (mark bingham)
This might shed a little light why lists are often incorrect. But I'll bet an e-mail to Mr. Erickson would pin it
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/transportation/july96/erickson_twa_7-24.html

JIM LEHRER: Why was the--why is the--just go through the mechanics of this for us, Mr. Erickson, so we can understand--why is the passenger manifest, the official passenger manifest of Flight 800 or any flight of TWA or any other airline not accurate when it--when the flight--when the plane takes off?

MR. ERICKSON: Well, a number of things--things happen. You may have people that are taken off the airplane and moved to other flights. That, indeed, happened in this case. There are a number of--

JIM LEHRER: In other words--excuse me--on 800 there were names on the official passenger list who were not, in fact, on that plane, is that right?

MR. ERICKSON: There were names on the, on the original manifest that did not, indeed, go on the flight. There were also a number of employees that use ticket lists, travel to get on the flight, so what we really had to do was to assemble from a variety of lists, from the manifest, from the baggage list, from the Immigration's list, we check all these. If they were all the same, there would have been no problem, but they, indeed, were different, and we wanted to desperately make sure that people weren’t getting informed, that they had lost someone that indeed wasn’t on the flight.

JIM LEHRER: How did you determine, for instance, if somebody’s name turned up on the master list, how did you determine that that person wasn’t, in fact, on that airplane when there were no bodies to look at, particularly the first twenty-four hours, forty-eight hours, et cetera?

MR. ERICKSON: Well, of course, we match it against the, the baggage list. The baggage list is very accurate but not everybody checks a bag, so not everybody is on that list, but, but we go through a variety of techniques. We’ll check the boarding passes from all the different stations that people may have started to, to connect to the, to this flight, and assemble it all through the course of the night to make sure that it’s accurate, it’s been submitted to the NTSB, and then we start notification which began at about 8 AM.

JIM LEHRER: That’s 8 AM the next day.

MR. ERICKSON: Correct.

JIM LEHRER: Were there cases where people flew under different names?

MR. ERICKSON: There were several cases where, where people either through a divorce or separation situation were under different names. That confused the issue a little bit. It’s a complex--it’s a complex situation that we worked through as quickly as we could. We’d like to see it improve.


I should also add he was so late, the United attendants had to reopen the door to the boarding ramp and let him on the plane. But still that may not be the reason why he wasn't on that jpg. list

[Dog Town]

Just a thought on 93! If I remember right? Pan Am Locherbee(sp) was blown up in mid air. It had rather large pieces, not small. Because it did not smash into the ground, at high speeds!

DT

[MarkyX]

I really want to thank Gumboot for writing up a long but informative article on NORAD. I will be posting it as a seperate document because it's very long one and will link it.

By the way, any willing hosts able to host this guide? I plan on having it on HTML format (like Gravy's Guide) as well as a PDF version.

[defaultdotxbe]

I really want to thank Gumboot for writing up a long but informative article on NORAD. I will be posting it as a seperate document because it's very long one and will link it.

By the way, any willing hosts able to host this guide? I plan on having it on HTML format (like Gravy's Guide) as well as a PDF version.

i can host it for you

[MarkyX]

Goody

Think you can handle the bandwidth? It has a lot of pictures

[defaultdotxbe]

Goody

Think you can handle the bandwidth? It has a lot of pictures

im pretty sure, i have alot of transfer to spare

[MarkyX]

Okay, moving onto Flight 93.

The 8-mile debris, explainations?

And anything from a missile expert if it did hit Flight 93.

And what about the hole? Any reasonable sources for that one?

[Class]

Okay, moving onto Flight 93.

The 8-mile debris, explainations?

And anything from a missile expert if it did hit Flight 93.

And what about the hole? Any reasonable sources for that one?

The debris found 8 miles away was paper.

[MarkyX]

And where is the source for this?

I need zee sources otherwise it will look like I am making **** up.

[Hishighness]

You know FAQs? I'm doing a FDT for 9/11.

All I need is some people to slap in a theory or two, and perhaps a source. I'll deal with the answers (although if it's somewhat complex, post it here).

So if you have any theories that are commonly bought in message boards by idiots, post it here and I may add it to the list.

Pictures will also do.Marky, can I make a suggestion? Don't take this the wrong way I enjoyed SLC because Avery and his merry men are such morons, but I think if you want to reach a wider swath you need to drop the mocking routine. That was the one thing that turned me off personally about SLC is your seeming personal attacks of the creators, now I think they're a bunch of douche bags too, but I think the personal attacks might serve to alienate those on the fence. That's just my $0.02

[gumboot]

And anything from a missile expert if it did hit Flight 93.


We can rule out a heat-seeking missile...

According to the FDR from UA93, both engines were running normally (and attached to the plane) at 70% thrust at the moment of impact.

The NTSB FDR report for UA93 is here (http://www.gwu.edu/%7Ensarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB196/doc04.pdf).

For laymen, someone on a professional pilot's forum has provided the key specs at impact here (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showpost.php?p=2778627&postcount=145).

According to the Flight Data Recorder from UA93, it impacted the ground at about 500kts (575 MPH) in a 40 degree nose down attitude, with a 150 degree roll angle to starboard.

A few observations from the FDR data at IMPACT;

1. Cabin pressure - NORMAL
2. Hydraulics - NORMAL
3. Cargo fire - NORMAL
4. Smoke - NORMAL
5. Engines - RUNNING
6. Engine RPM (N1) 70%
7. Fuel pressure - NORMAL
8. Engine vibration - LO

9. Wind direction - WEST
10. Wind speed - 25 kts

11. Pitch angle - 40 deg down
12. Airspeed - 500 kts
13. Heading - 180 deg
14. Roll angle - 150 deg right
15. AoA - 20 deg negative

-Andrew

[gumboot]

Just a thought on 93! If I remember right? Pan Am Locherbee(sp) was blown up in mid air. It had rather large pieces, not small. Because it did not smash into the ground, at high speeds!

DT

And at least two people in Pan Am Flight 103 survived the impact with the ground - a flight attendant was found alive, but died shortly after, and a male passenger was also found alive - medical personnel believed he probably would have survived if he had been found earlier.

Not to mention the debris field covered over 800 sq km. Other similar airborne break ups routinely produce debris fields covering hundreds of kilometers.

I would not be overly surprised to discover debris had landed 8 miles away from a ground impact at 500 Kt.

-Andrew

ETA. Sorry, the lockerbie wreckage covered 845 sq mi, or 2189 km^2.

[Gravy]

The debris found 8 miles away was paper.

That's correct. Some pieces of paper, some bits of nylon, all found downwind from the crash site. Nothing unusual.

[jhunter1163]

Marky, would you mind if I PM'd you a list of spelling corrections? I was a proofreader in an earlier career and could help you clean it up a bit. The content, by the way, is outstanding.

[MarkyX]

Marky, would you mind if I PM'd you a list of spelling corrections? I was a proofreader in an earlier career and could help you clean it up a bit. The content, by the way, is outstanding.

Be my guest

[kevin]

Going to need some help with Flight 93. It's probably my weakest one.

Does anyone know some good 'common theories' and answers to them? Anything will do.

killtown's "fake photo" proves no Flight 93. He manages to fail to prove the photo is fake (or even raise reasonable doubt), and even if he could prove it fake it still wouldn't prove no Flight 93. 2 strikes right there!

[MarkyX]

I remember a while ago someone posted a picture of another flight crashed that looked quite similar to Flight 93. It was a black and white photo and there wasn't much trace of Flight 93.

[defaultdotxbe]

website up

http://www.lolinfowars.co.nr

http://screwloosechange.xbehome.com/fst

[Peephole]

We can rule out a heat-seeking missile...

According to the FDR from UA93, both engines were running normally (and attached to the plane) at 70% thrust at the moment of impact.

The NTSB FDR report for UA93 is here (http://www.gwu.edu/%7Ensarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB196/doc04.pdf).

For laymen, someone on a professional pilot's forum has provided the key specs at impact here (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showpost.php?p=2778627&postcount=145).

According to the Flight Data Recorder from UA93, it impacted the ground at about 500kts (575 MPH) in a 40 degree nose down attitude, with a 150 degree roll angle to starboard.
Sorry for digging this up but I posted those specs somewhere else and someone (no CT) doubted if the plane could have reached an AoA of 20 degrees negative. Is this indeed an error in the FDR or is he wrong?

[gumboot]

Sorry for digging this up but I posted those specs somewhere else and someone (no CT) doubted if the plane could have reached an AoA of 20 degrees negative. Is this indeed an error in the FDR or is he wrong?



I can't see why that would be impossible. It was in a nose dive at a very steep bank. What it basically means is the wings were well and truly stalled, not generating any lift whatsoever. That's not surprising. Don't forget the roll angle was -150 right, which means it was upside down (180 degrees would be perpendicular). I'm not an aviation expert, but I imagine going inverted has all sorts of affects on the angle of attack.

-Gumboot

[WilliamSeger]

My favorite dumb theory is that THIS (and the 150-ton, 500mph plane that caused it) shouldn't have had any effect at all on something as sturdy as the WTC towers:

http://usinfo.state.gov/topical/pol/terror/album/images/440/400553.jpg

But THIS kind of stuff is deadly:

http://img340.imageshack.us/img340/9370/wtc1detonations2cap019vj.jpg

[Retrograde]

Getting back to the hijackers - I mean, the alledged "hijackers": don't forget they were all cave-dweeling goatherds! How do you herd goats in a cave anyway?

[Kiwiwriter]

Have you got the garbage about 4,000 Jews being told not to go to the World Trade Center that day?

[Mancman]

gfvfjcjfggkghgffgcfcfcgvhljhbhjb

How did you manage to write 10 posts of such quality?

[Coritani]

How did you manage to write 10 posts of such quality?

Haha, banned after 11 posts. I love this place.