IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 27th December 2013, 02:00 PM   #81
ozeco41
Philosopher
 
ozeco41's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Moss Vale, NSW, Australia
Posts: 7,617
Originally Posted by david.watts View Post
What is the plausibility it occurred? .
Now you are talking.

The issue is about items of "fact" and whether those items are true fact or false fact....to some standard of roof where "beyond reasonable doubt" is a good choice.

1) WTC Towers were standing on 9/10 >> True of False?
2) Planes hit WTC Twins on 9/11 >> True of False?
3) Planes did damage, fires started, more damage accumulated >> True of False?
4) Twins collapsed on 9/11 >> True of False?
5) Prima facie hypothesis planes plus fire caused collapses >> True of False?
6) Some people have claimed that collapse was helped by CD or OHMI (other malicious human intervention) >> True of False?
7) If someone wants to improve the "planes and fire" hypothesis they are entitled to improve it by suggesting a better hypothesis >> True of False?
8) No one has ever put forward a better hypothesis which included CD or OHMI >> True of False?

Ball in your court d.w. Go for it.
ozeco41 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th December 2013, 02:57 PM   #82
MarkLindeman
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 493
Originally Posted by david.watts View Post
Probability is for future events. Plausibility is for past events. What is the probability something might occur? What is the plausibility it occurred?

I should have made the statement differently. I should have defined things in terms of what is the probability that a particular implausibility would occur. Sorry.

So, the probability would be based on how implausible was the outcome.
ozeco may (or may not) think he knows what this means, but I don't. Plausibility seems to be some sort of ex ante probability. But introducing the term "plausibility" doesn't seem to get at any of the problems raised in the thread. Arbitrarily many unlikely events occur every day, most of them unnoticed. How would one go about determining whether yesterday's events on the street where you live were "implausibly unlikely"?

I don't mean to short-circuit whatever "restate[ment]" you are undertaking, only to caution against being too encouraged by that hearty "Now you are talking."
MarkLindeman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th December 2013, 03:13 PM   #83
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
 
jaydeehess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
Originally Posted by jaydeehess View Post
GIVEN: that personal effects of passengers and crew are always found after the crash of airliners, the probability of such happening in this case is nigh on 100%. In fact one of the hardest things that NTSB crews have to do is deal with the emotional trauma of finding things like a child's shoes.
Do you have an example of an airliner crash in which no trace of personal effects are found?

In this case only those effects that made it out of the building are most likely to be found. These would necessarily be items small and light enough to be blown out while not being torn apart. The larger the object the greater the pressure differential accross it and the greater the odds of it being torn apart. The denser the item the less the odds that it will get enough force behind it to clear the perimeter of the structure.

A human body is both relatively dense, and relatively large. Odds of it escaping the towers are small and even if it did (as in if the person were standing next to the window at the time) the mere fact of it being outside the tower and hundreds of feet in the air bode ill for the continued survival of that person. In addition, since it is rather dense it is also not likely to go very far from the building and that will result in that person's body being buried by the rubble when the structure collapses.

A passport IS lightweight. It is also relatively small and has a relatively tough front and back cover. You may remember the office papers blowing about when the towers were hit, and again when they fell. Once outside the towers paper objects are light enough to be affected by wind and to 'flutter', both of which allow it to remain in the air for a longer time than denser objects would. This then increases the probability of a paper object moving outside the area where the bulk of the rubble will be when the towers collapse. That alone tells you that these two properties bode well for an item to escape destruction.


In summary then:
- low density increases probability of an item escaping the building
- small size increases probability of an item escaping the building
- the fact of large amounts of paper blowing around illustrates good probability that any specific paper object will escape the structure
Originally Posted by david.watts View Post
We all understand almost anything is possible, but what were the odds?
Did you read my post?

If you can find an airliner crash where personal effects of occupants are not found let us know.
If you do not recall all the paper blowing about when the planes hit and again when the towers came down I am sure we can find a link to video of it.

The odds were pretty good.
You want a number? In light of the fact that the passport was found I'll set this in the frame of reference of the time of impact.
At that time the odds were, in my inimitable estimation, between 75% and 90%. At that time the odds were not 100% as the path the passport took could not be fully predicted, but neither were they less than 75% since most airliner crashes do turn up most of the occupant's personal effects.
jaydeehess is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th December 2013, 03:16 PM   #84
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
 
jaydeehess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
Originally Posted by Mikeys View Post
I would think that to survive one need to be able to separate bs from probability before one can consider reality.
Ok grasshopper, put the bong down and come back later.
jaydeehess is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th December 2013, 03:17 PM   #85
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
 
jaydeehess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
Originally Posted by Mikeys View Post
Ill turn it around; if the odds of a terrorist attack on the US was near 100%, why we had gotten so complacent with security.
Because humans are quite well known to have buracracies that are more prone to reaction than prevention.

Mind you it was also a dead certainty that people would die in spaceflight, they have and they will continue to do so. That is a function of the number of things that CAN go wrong enough to kill a person.

In the case of terrorism, as the oft repeated saying goes, "We have to get it right all the time, they have to get it right ONCE!"

Last edited by jaydeehess; 27th December 2013 at 03:31 PM.
jaydeehess is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th December 2013, 03:29 PM   #86
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
 
jaydeehess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
Originally Posted by david.watts View Post
I have thought about your many comments. They have been a big help in seeing that my case was stated ... not so well. Thank you.

Clarification: If a tails-up penny was found in the street and it was determined it came from UA 175, that would mean it was part of that day's event. What is the probability that it landed tails up? One in two. Would I include that in trying to determine how unlikely/improbable it is that the "official story" explains what happened on 9/11? No. Why? It is very plausible.

Probability is for future events. Plausibility is for past events. What is the probability something might occur? What is the plausibility it occurred?

I should have made the statement differently. I should have defined things in terms of what is the probability that a particular implausibility would occur. Sorry.

So, the probability would be based on how implausible was the outcome.

I will see how I can restate more properly my case.
The odds of a penny exiting UA175 and landing in the street tails up and you finding it would eb
(odds of penny exiting the aircraft) X (odds of landing tails up) X (odds of you finding it on the street).
We know the middle one is 0.5 (50%). The other two are more difficult. For the last factor we need to know how often you walk the streets of Manhattan, how often you walk with your head down, etc.

For that first factor we'd have to rely on past history in aircraft crashes and how often coins are found versus an estimate of how many coins could be expected to be in the pockets and purses of the occupants. That way you could determine the estimated percentage of coins that were on the aircraft that were found afterwards.

I would not suggest doing this exercise for the WTC though, as the occupants of the building probably had coins with their personal belongings as well. Passports though? Not many building occupants would have theirs with them. Its not something one should, or would be inclined to, keep at the office.
jaydeehess is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th December 2013, 03:50 PM   #87
Andy_Ross
Penultimate Amazing
 
Andy_Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 47,040
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
How about finding this after Columbia broke up returning from space?

http://i1124.photobucket.com/albums/...wood/patch.jpg

What do think the odds were of this?
That is the exact example I was going to post.
Andy_Ross is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th December 2013, 04:14 PM   #88
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
 
jaydeehess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
One should note as well that despite the very very looong odds, people DO win the powerball even when not every combination has been purchased.
jaydeehess is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th December 2013, 04:25 PM   #89
Mark F
Graduate Poster
 
Mark F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,744
Originally Posted by david.watts View Post
Probability is for future events. Plausibility is for past events. What is the probability something might occur? What is the plausibility it occurred?

I should have made the statement differently. I should have defined things in terms of what is the probability that a particular implausibility would occur. Sorry.

So, the probability would be based on how implausible was the outcome.

I will see how I can restate more properly my case.
Alrighty then.

Your sole example - the recovered passport - is far from implausible. Finding such items after air crashes is not in fact unusual in any way. Combined with the fact that the recovered passport is of no use as evidence against the alleged hijackers means there is no greater meaning to finding it other than it was found. Someone at some point simply decided to arbitrarily imply greater meaning to it than it deserves and thus it has entered the Truther folklore.

What are you trying to imply? Are you trying to say finding the passport was at best highly unlikely?

Impossible perhaps?

Great. At least that is something we can work with. If so, how does that impact what we know about what happened on 9/11? If it doesn't change anything then why should we care? If it changes something, what does it change, how does it change it and of course, why should we care?

I guess what I am getting at is that after 3 pages it is time to get to the point. What exactly are you trying to allege occurred and what is your argument specifically in support of that allegation? If you want to claim the passport was planted then by all means just come out and say it, and support your claim with whatever proof you have to present. Explain to us who planted it, how and most importantly of all WHY? Otherwise lets move on.

Personally I'm getting a bit fed up with all these attempts to not get to the point.
__________________
So I'm going to tell you what the facts are, and the facts are the facts, but then we know the truth. That always overcomes facts.
Mark F is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th December 2013, 04:28 PM   #90
alienentity
Illuminator
 
alienentity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 4,325
Originally Posted by david.watts View Post
I have thought about your many comments. They have been a big help in seeing that my case was stated ... not so well. Thank you.

Clarification: If a tails-up penny was found in the street and it was determined it came from UA 175, that would mean it was part of that day's event. What is the probability that it landed tails up? One in two. Would I include that in trying to determine how unlikely/improbable it is that the "official story" explains what happened on 9/11? No. Why? It is very plausible.

Probability is for future events. Plausibility is for past events. What is the probability something might occur? What is the plausibility it occurred?

I should have made the statement differently. I should have defined things in terms of what is the probability that a particular implausibility would occur. Sorry.

So, the probability would be based on how implausible was the outcome.

I will see how I can restate more properly my case.
You're not fooling anyone. Well, perhaps not entirely true: I think you're fooling yourself into believing that you have any real argument of merit.
You don't.

The big problem with 9/11 Truth claims is that they're not based on facts.
Fact: the passport was recovered. Nothing you can do to change that. It offends your sensibilities, but that's life. Get over it.
Not Fact: it was 'planted' there by some conspiracy. (If you believe this, then you prefer conjecture to facts.)

Fact: 2 jets hit the towers
Fact: large fires on many floors continued until the towers collapsed
Not Fact: The towers were destroyed by controlled demolition

Fact: The steel recovered and inspected showed no signs of controlled demolition
Not Fact: There were explosives in the towers

Speculation doesn't trump fact
Central facts about the flights and collapses cannot be ignored in a serious examination; they cannot be handwaved away.
If you do this, you're neither honest nor serious about any of it.
__________________
Heiwa - 'Anyone suggesting that part C structure can one-way crush down part A structure is complicit to mass murder!'
000063 - 'Problem with the Truthers' theories is that anyone with enough power to pull it off doesn't need to in the first place.'
mrkinnies 'I'm not a no-planer' 'I don't believe Flight 77 hit the Pentagon'

Last edited by alienentity; 27th December 2013 at 05:24 PM.
alienentity is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th December 2013, 04:31 PM   #91
alienentity
Illuminator
 
alienentity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 4,325
David's trying to chip away at reality by rhetorical games such that everything becomes equally improbable and equally possible.
Therefore he hopes to elevate the speculation of highly improbable and implausible things to the same level as established facts.

The key is to avoid facts, or at least deny as many details of those facts as possible.
__________________
Heiwa - 'Anyone suggesting that part C structure can one-way crush down part A structure is complicit to mass murder!'
000063 - 'Problem with the Truthers' theories is that anyone with enough power to pull it off doesn't need to in the first place.'
mrkinnies 'I'm not a no-planer' 'I don't believe Flight 77 hit the Pentagon'
alienentity is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th December 2013, 04:38 PM   #92
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
 
jaydeehess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
The "only one file cabinet" item came up. I hope the " no toilets were recovered" item does not make an appearance.
jaydeehess is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th December 2013, 04:43 PM   #93
ozeco41
Philosopher
 
ozeco41's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Moss Vale, NSW, Australia
Posts: 7,617
Originally Posted by alienentity View Post
David's trying to chip away at reality by rhetorical games such that everything becomes equally improbable and equally possible.
Therefore he hopes to elevate the speculation of highly improbable and implausible things to the same level as established facts.
That process is PLAUSIBLE and highly PROBABLE and, after he has done it the probability of what will then be a past event, will be 100%, or, in his own words:
Originally Posted by david.watts View Post
What happened in the past is 100% guaranteed that it happened....
..and my comment refers to the PROCESS of discussion NOT the CONTENT of discussion. A level of abstraction which will PROBABLY confuse him.....and a few others. What are the ODDS??


Originally Posted by alienentity View Post
The key is to avoid facts, or at least deny as many details of those facts as possible.
If he was serious he could list the facts that he claims support CD THEN we can work through the list with him and show why all the "old ones" are false AND - if he has any - decide whether his "new ones" are true.

So far I don't recall seeing any "new ones".
ozeco41 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th December 2013, 04:44 PM   #94
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
 
jaydeehess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
Originally Posted by alienentity View Post
David's trying to chip away at reality by rhetorical games such that everything becomes equally improbable and equally possible.
Therefore he hopes to elevate the speculation of highly improbable and implausible things to the same level as established facts.

The key is to avoid facts, or at least deny as many details of those facts as possible.
Oh, I see. " You guys accept that it was improbable for a few passports to be found, but turn around and declare it improbable that explosives were loaded into the buildings in such a fashion as to avoid detection, survive aircraft impact, survive fire and be used to collapse the buildings".
jaydeehess is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th December 2013, 04:48 PM   #95
ozeco41
Philosopher
 
ozeco41's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Moss Vale, NSW, Australia
Posts: 7,617
The whole "probability" or "odds" topic is an evasion.

What happened on 9/11 is a matter of accumulated facts.
He has yet to identify one item of fact and show how it outweighs as evidence the countervailing facts.

Here is a starting list for you to prove wrong David:
Quote:
1) WTC Towers were standing on 9/10 >> True of False?
2) Planes hit WTC Twins on 9/11 >> True of False?
3) Planes did damage, fires started, more damage accumulated >> True of False?
4) Twins collapsed on 9/11 >> True of False?
5) Prima facie hypothesis planes plus fire caused collapses >> True of False?
6) Some people have claimed that collapse was helped by CD or OHMI (other malicious human intervention) >> True of False?
7) If someone wants to improve the "planes and fire" hypothesis they are entitled to improve it by suggesting a better hypothesis >> True of False?
8) No one has ever put forward a better hypothesis which included CD or OHMI >> True of False?
And those only set the context BEFORE you start to present your argument and your stronger evidence.

Last edited by ozeco41; 27th December 2013 at 04:52 PM.
ozeco41 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th December 2013, 04:51 PM   #96
alienentity
Illuminator
 
alienentity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 4,325
Originally Posted by ozeco41 View Post
The whole "probability" or "odds" topic is an evasion.

What happened on 9/11 is a matter of accumulated facts.
He has yet to identify one item of fact and show how it outweighs as evidence the countervailing facts.
That's right.
__________________
Heiwa - 'Anyone suggesting that part C structure can one-way crush down part A structure is complicit to mass murder!'
000063 - 'Problem with the Truthers' theories is that anyone with enough power to pull it off doesn't need to in the first place.'
mrkinnies 'I'm not a no-planer' 'I don't believe Flight 77 hit the Pentagon'
alienentity is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th December 2013, 04:54 PM   #97
ozeco41
Philosopher
 
ozeco41's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Moss Vale, NSW, Australia
Posts: 7,617
Originally Posted by alienentity View Post
That's right.
Has to be true - I said it AND you agreed.






ozeco41 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th December 2013, 05:04 PM   #98
david.watts
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 293
Sorry. Had to leave and took longer than I thought plus had to crash for a bit on the couch.

I am going to take a time out. I may have a different way to go about this that may address things you have said. Let me read the comments I have not seen yet and think about my different possible approach. It is basically not very much different but in a significantly different context.

You have made some very good points. Again, I am now in a time out. Plan to let you know how long it might be when I get an idea.
david.watts is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th December 2013, 05:08 PM   #99
Mikeys
Muse
 
Mikeys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 501
Originally Posted by Mark F View Post
What are you trying to imply? Are you trying to say finding the passport was at best highly unlikely?
Unlikely maybe not, but kind of stupid. They didn't find any more passports or personal documents.
__________________
There is no escape from truth.
Mikeys is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th December 2013, 05:27 PM   #100
alienentity
Illuminator
 
alienentity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 4,325
Originally Posted by Mikeys View Post
Unlikely maybe not, but kind of stupid. They didn't find any more passports or personal documents.
But the question which must be asked is: did Americans typically carry passports on domestic flights in 2001?
We might not expect them to, nor for there to be other passports found.

I believe a lot of wallets were found. Most guys carry a wallet.
__________________
Heiwa - 'Anyone suggesting that part C structure can one-way crush down part A structure is complicit to mass murder!'
000063 - 'Problem with the Truthers' theories is that anyone with enough power to pull it off doesn't need to in the first place.'
mrkinnies 'I'm not a no-planer' 'I don't believe Flight 77 hit the Pentagon'
alienentity is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th December 2013, 05:39 PM   #101
Mikeys
Muse
 
Mikeys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 501
Originally Posted by alienentity View Post
But the question which must be asked is: did Americans typically carry passports on domestic flights in 2001?
We might not expect them to, nor for there to be other passports found.

I believe a lot of wallets were found. Most guys carry a wallet.
Can you point me to these wallets?
__________________
There is no escape from truth.
Mikeys is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th December 2013, 05:41 PM   #102
alienentity
Illuminator
 
alienentity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 4,325
Originally Posted by Mikeys View Post
Can you point me to these wallets?
Here's one




http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-rescuers.html
__________________
Heiwa - 'Anyone suggesting that part C structure can one-way crush down part A structure is complicit to mass murder!'
000063 - 'Problem with the Truthers' theories is that anyone with enough power to pull it off doesn't need to in the first place.'
mrkinnies 'I'm not a no-planer' 'I don't believe Flight 77 hit the Pentagon'
alienentity is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th December 2013, 06:13 PM   #103
Orphia Nay
Penguilicious Spodmaster.
Tagger
 
Orphia Nay's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Ponylandistan Presidential Palace (above the Spods' stables).
Posts: 45,218
Originally Posted by david.watts View Post
I mean, what were the odds that one hijacker's passport would be found
Originally Posted by 16.5 View Post
Pretty bad, because I believe three of the hijackers' passports were found. One in New York and two in Pennsylvania.

3 out of 19 I guess?
Originally Posted by pgimeno View Post
Actually four, if we count the one in the luggage of Abdulaziz Alomari that didn't make it to Flight 11. Not that important for the argument, though.
From page 542 of the 9/11 Commission Report:

"106. Only the passports of Satam al Suqami and Abdul Aziz al Omari were recovered after 9/11."

That bit could just be referring to AA11.

Nonetheless, david.watts, your estimated probability of a passport being found has just increased by 200% to 400%.
Orphia Nay is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th December 2013, 06:34 PM   #104
Mikeys
Muse
 
Mikeys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 501
Originally Posted by alienentity View Post
It is the same newspaper that spanked Spanx. One wallet with documents against one arab passport. They didn't make much effort.
__________________
There is no escape from truth.
Mikeys is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th December 2013, 06:45 PM   #105
Orphia Nay
Penguilicious Spodmaster.
Tagger
 
Orphia Nay's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Ponylandistan Presidential Palace (above the Spods' stables).
Posts: 45,218
From PENTTBOM:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PENTTBO...orts_recovered

According to testimony by Susan Ginsberg, a staff member of the National Commission on Terrorist attacks upon the United States, in the January 26, 2004 Public Hearing:
"Four of the hijackers' passports have survived in whole or in part. Two were recovered from the crash site of United Airlines flight 93 in Pennsylvania. These are the passports of Ziad Jarrah and Saeed al Ghamdi. One belonged to a hijacker on American Airlines flight 11. This is the passport of Satam al Suqami. A passerby picked it up and gave it to a NYPD detective shortly before the World Trade Center towers collapsed. A fourth passport was recovered from luggage that did not make it from a Portland flight to Boston on to the connecting flight which was American Airlines flight 11. This is the passport of Abdul Aziz al Omari."
"In addition to these four, some digital copies of the hijackers passports were recovered in post-9/11 operations. Two of the passports that have survived, those of Satam al Suqami and Abdul Aziz al Omari, were clearly doctored. To avoid getting into classified detail, we will just state that these were manipulated in a fraudulent manner in ways that have been associated with al Qaeda."
Orphia Nay is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th December 2013, 06:51 PM   #106
alienentity
Illuminator
 
alienentity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 4,325
Originally Posted by Mikeys View Post
Can you point me to these wallets?
..I noticed in the courtyard that there were valises, suitcases, strewn about the courtyard. There were wallets everywhere, broken glass, and then I noticed that there were airplane tickets." FDNY firefighter John Moribito

I don't know what was done with all that stuff. But it was reported.

Never found this stuff very interesting to ponder but it sure sounds like lots of personal belongings from passengers. What else were you expecting?
__________________
Heiwa - 'Anyone suggesting that part C structure can one-way crush down part A structure is complicit to mass murder!'
000063 - 'Problem with the Truthers' theories is that anyone with enough power to pull it off doesn't need to in the first place.'
mrkinnies 'I'm not a no-planer' 'I don't believe Flight 77 hit the Pentagon'
alienentity is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th December 2013, 06:55 PM   #107
Garrison
Philosopher
 
Garrison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 6,140
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
Because we're Americans and don't like being bothered by things like the TSA. I figured even you would have gathered this by now.

It will happen again after the public forgets and sees no reason they have to remove their shoes or take shampoo bottles from their luggage.
Or when the terrorists figure out a different weakness in the system.
__________________
So I've started a blog about my writing. Check it out at: http://fourth-planet-problem.blogspot.com/
And my first book is on Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B077W322FX
Garrison is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th December 2013, 07:44 PM   #108
Robrob
Philosopher
 
Robrob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 5,497
Originally Posted by Mikeys View Post
It is the same newspaper that spanked Spanx. One wallet with documents against one arab passport. They didn't make much effort.
Hand wave noted.

Originally Posted by david.watts View Post
Improbable things regarding 9/11.
On September the 10th, if you tried to come up with the odds that certain things would happen the next day if an attack occurred that involved four hijacked airplanes doing what we saw on 9/11, what things would you include and what do you think the odds would be for that particular thing happening? Also include things that we learned about later; such as what are the odds the drills that were occurring happened to have occurred on the same day, 9/11.
Post facto, one can find a myriad of improbable coincidences in every single event. As mentioned earlier, people win the lottery with worse odds. Picking a winning lottery number AFTER the drawing isn't that difficult. Likewise, connecting random dots AFTER an incident isn't more than an exercise in pareidolia.

Quote:
For example, finding an undamaged passport of somebody on one of the planes that hit the Twin Towers, was that improbable? I think it was. How improbable was it do you think? I think that it was much more improbable that it was one of the hijacker’s passports.
Passports are made to be nearly indestructible. They are light and unbreakable. In your pocket they have a very good chance (as does your thick leather billfold) of surviving relatively intact.

Quote:
What do you think the probability or odds were in finding not just a passport, but a hijacker’s passport? Tell me what you think, was it is one in … what? What in how many?
Considering the hijackers were nearly 10% of the passengers and most likely the only ones carrying passports as identification! I'd say there was pretty good odds.
__________________
Mister Earl: "The plural of bollocks is not evidence."
Robrob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th December 2013, 08:06 PM   #109
david.watts
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 293
Originally Posted by Orphia Nay View Post
From PENTTBOM:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PENTTBO...orts_recovered

According to testimony by Susan Ginsberg, a staff member of the National Commission on Terrorist attacks upon the United States, in the January 26, 2004 Public Hearing:
"Four of the hijackers' passports have survived in whole or in part. Two were recovered from the crash site of United Airlines flight 93 in Pennsylvania. These are the passports of Ziad Jarrah and Saeed al Ghamdi. One belonged to a hijacker on American Airlines flight 11. This is the passport of Satam al Suqami. A passerby picked it up and gave it to a NYPD detective shortly before the World Trade Center towers collapsed. A fourth passport was recovered from luggage that did not make it from a Portland flight to Boston on to the connecting flight which was American Airlines flight 11. This is the passport of Abdul Aziz al Omari."
"In addition to these four, some digital copies of the hijackers passports were recovered in post-9/11 operations. Two of the passports that have survived, those of Satam al Suqami and Abdul Aziz al Omari, were clearly doctored. To avoid getting into classified detail, we will just state that these were manipulated in a fraudulent manner in ways that have been associated with al Qaeda."
Thank you for pointing this out. But I should say, is it "possible" that statement is either not correct or a lie. I want to be clear: that is NOT impossible. I had not seen that before. Thanks for being here.

Last edited by david.watts; 27th December 2013 at 08:11 PM.
david.watts is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th December 2013, 08:15 PM   #110
Redwood
Graduate Poster
 
Redwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,557
Originally Posted by david.watts View Post
Are you saying that because you flipped a coin and it came up "tails" 100 times in a row, the probability that it would come up 100 times in a row as "tails" was 100%? Given that example, everything that has ever happened in history was 100% guaranteed. Was it not? That would explain why Las Vegas does not take bets after a game.
What are the odds in a poker game of one player getting a full house, aces high, but another player getting a straight flush (king high)? It's happened. I know, because I've seen it myself. Even odder, the player with the straight flush was having a "hot" night, while the loser with the full house was having a really bad night.

I've even seen a player go a long session of poker without winning a single hand. What are the odds? Both of these were in low-stakes poker amongst friends.
Redwood is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th December 2013, 08:33 PM   #111
000063
Philosopher
 
000063's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 5,398
Originally Posted by david.watts View Post
Improbable things regarding 9/11.

What improbable things happened regarding 9/11?

We all understand almost anything is possible, but what are the odds?

On September the 10th, if you tried to come up with the odds that certain things would happen the next day if an attack occurred that involved four hijacked airplanes doing what we saw on 9/11, what things would you include and what do you think the odds would be for that particular thing happening? Also include things that we learned about later; such as what are the odds the drills that were occurring happened to have occurred on the same day, 9/11.

For example, finding an undamaged passport of somebody on one of the planes that hit the Twin Towers, was that improbable? I think it was. How improbable was it do you think? I think that it was much more improbable that it was one of the hijacker’s passports. How much more improbable does that make it? When I say “how improbable” I mean what are the odds. For example was it a one in two possibility? Or a one in ten possibility? What do you think the probability or odds were in finding not just a passport, but a hijacker’s passport? Tell me what you think, was it is one in … what? What in how many?


We all understand almost anything is possible, but what are the odds?
So come up with as many things as you can that the odds of it happening were less than 1 in 2, i.e., fifty - fifty. And state what you think the reasonable odds would have been on the day before 9/11.
YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE


You're trying to cloak the "first time in history" fallacy. The question is less "is it likely" than "did it happen". It's also ironic, since Truthers have yet to come up with a theory that is even physically possible.

Originally Posted by BadBoy View Post
I think the chance of finding somthing personal for one or more of the passengers would be quite high. Many items went right through the building, as did many parts of the aircraft.

Whats your point
Look, they clearly took the effects from the people on the planes, flew them to New York, planted them in the impact zone of the towers, and blew them out with air cannons when the planes hit.

Simples.

Originally Posted by david.watts View Post
Are you saying that because you flipped a coin and it came up "tails" 100 times in a row, the probability that it would come up 100 times in a row as "tails" was 100%? Given that example, everything that has ever happened in history was 100% guaranteed. Was it not? That would explain why Las Vegas does not take bets after a game.
Those are exactly the same odds for getting 50 T/50 H in that order, or 99T/1H, und so weiter.

(Actually, the average quarter is slightly weighted.)

Originally Posted by jaydeehess View Post
One should note as well that despite the very very looong odds, people DO win the powerball even when not every combination has been purchased.
Sometimes multiple people pick the same lottery number.

Originally Posted by jaydeehess View Post
Oh, I see. " You guys accept that it was improbable for a few passports to be found, but turn around and declare it improbable that explosives were loaded into the buildings in such a fashion as to avoid detection, survive aircraft impact, survive fire and be used to collapse the buildings".
Trying to talk their way around explaining how the explosives could be protected and not be even more conspicuous and harder to install, seems to be the idea.

Originally Posted by Robrob View Post
Post facto, one can find a myriad of improbable coincidences in every single event. As mentioned earlier, people win the lottery with worse odds. Picking a winning lottery number AFTER the drawing isn't that difficult. Likewise, connecting random dots AFTER an incident isn't more than an exercise in pareidolia.
Apophenia, in this case.
000063 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th December 2013, 08:43 PM   #112
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 26,122
Originally Posted by david.watts View Post
Thank you for pointing this out. But I should say, is it "possible" that statement is either not correct or a lie. I want to be clear: that is NOT impossible. I had not seen that before. Thanks for being here.
What a load of nonsense. You make up lies about 911, and the passports being found is one you imply they were planted. Which is a big lie.

Quote:
10. Two hijacker’s passports survived the aircraft crashes on 9/11 as well as a hijacker’s bandana. One of the passports was from a plane that impacted one of the Twin Towers and was found on the streets below. The passport came away unscathed from the violent crash and tremendous fireball. The other passport was found unscathed from the wreckage of the airplane that disappeared into the ground in Pennsylvania. The undamaged (looked just like new) red bandana was also found in the same wreckage of the airplane that disappeared into the ground. Each one surviving in such good condition is by itself nearly impossible. But what about ALL three? (Remember, all three items were central to “proving” that Muslim hijackers were responsible. These weren’t random/miscellaneous findings.) Well, (one nearly impossible) times (another nearly impossible) times (another nearly impossible) = virtually NO chance at all. Now multiply “virtually no chance” by the chance that each item in this list could have happened the way the Official Story requires, and what do you get? How about virtual-ZERO. If the passports and bandana were planted at the scene, what is the chance of finding all three? 100%, of course. So virtual-zero% vs. 100%. This alone virtually proves the Official Story to be a lie.
http://www.opednews.com/Diary/9-11-H...80324-705.html
It appears you can't do the math. Is math prohibited by 911 truth?

No, this was not central to identifying who hijacked the planes, the FBI found that 19 were responsible by conducting the biggest investigation in history, one you deny happened because you hate the USA, and can't do research. You make fun of thousands murdered on 911 by spreading nonsense.


What will you do when you find out other passenger items were found, and other hijacker stuff was not found. Your claims are based on lies, faulty logic, ignorance, and no applicable experience. You say you are a pilot, and have no idea what is typically found in aircraft accidents.
beachnut is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th December 2013, 08:45 PM   #113
Orphia Nay
Penguilicious Spodmaster.
Tagger
 
Orphia Nay's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Ponylandistan Presidential Palace (above the Spods' stables).
Posts: 45,218
Originally Posted by david.watts View Post
Thank you for pointing this out. But I should say, is it "possible" that statement is either not correct or a lie. I want to be clear: that is NOT impossible. I had not seen that before. Thanks for being here.
In addition to my above posts, there's this from the Moussaoui trial evidence:

Page 37 and part of U.S. Visa page from Ziad Jarrah's Passport recovered at the United Airlines Flight 93 crash site

http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notable...A00105-08.html

What evidence do you have that the PENTTBOM statement I posted is a lie?

Do you have memos, or photographs relating to people "planting" the recovered passports?
Orphia Nay is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th December 2013, 08:45 PM   #114
Redwood
Graduate Poster
 
Redwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,557
David, I notice that over the five years you've been a member, most of your posts have come in the last few months, and they're all regarding 9/11. I surmise that something must have "lit a fire" with you. If so, would you care to share it?
Redwood is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th December 2013, 08:49 PM   #115
Orphia Nay
Penguilicious Spodmaster.
Tagger
 
Orphia Nay's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Ponylandistan Presidential Palace (above the Spods' stables).
Posts: 45,218
Oops, and also from the Moussaoui evidence:

http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notable...n/PA00108.html

Kingdom of Saudi Arabia passport for Saeed A A A Al Ghamdi recovered from the United Airlines Flight 93 crash site

You can see for yourself. HiRes images available on the linked pages.
Orphia Nay is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th December 2013, 09:08 PM   #116
kid meatball
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 303
Originally Posted by ozeco41 View Post


6) Some people have claimed that collapse was helped by CD or OHMI (George Takei) >> True of False?


Ball in your court d.w. Go for it.
Fixed.

Last edited by kid meatball; 27th December 2013 at 09:12 PM.
kid meatball is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th December 2013, 09:14 PM   #117
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
 
jaydeehess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
Originally Posted by Redwood View Post
What are the odds in a poker game of one player getting a full house, aces high, but another player getting a straight flush (king high)? It's happened. I know, because I've seen it myself. Even odder, the player with the straight flush was having a "hot" night, while the loser with the full house was having a really bad night.

I've even seen a player go a long session of poker without winning a single hand. What are the odds? Both of these were in low-stakes poker among friends.
I had a perfect Cribbage hand once. Oh what a feeling!

12,994,800:1 chance of that occurring (I just looked it up)

Last edited by jaydeehess; 27th December 2013 at 09:18 PM.
jaydeehess is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th December 2013, 09:22 PM   #118
Hans
Philosopher
 
Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 9,071
Originally Posted by Redwood View Post
What are the odds in a poker game of one player getting a full house, aces high, but another player getting a straight flush (king high)? It's happened. I know, because I've seen it myself. Even odder, the player with the straight flush was having a "hot" night, while the loser with the full house was having a really bad night.

I've even seen a player go a long session of poker without winning a single hand. What are the odds? Both of these were in low-stakes poker amongst friends.
I was once dealt a royal flush and three hands later got the exact same cards. That is a hand that comes up 650,000 to 1.... Figure the odds.....for 2 in 4 hands
Hans is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th December 2013, 10:15 PM   #119
Redwood
Graduate Poster
 
Redwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,557
Originally Posted by jaydeehess View Post
I had a perfect Cribbage hand once. Oh what a feeling!

12,994,800:1 chance of that occurring (I just looked it up)
Hey! My uncle just finally got one after 60+ years as an avid player.
Redwood is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th December 2013, 10:18 PM   #120
Redwood
Graduate Poster
 
Redwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,557
Originally Posted by Hans View Post
I was once dealt a royal flush and three hands later got the exact same cards. That is a hand that comes up 650,000 to 1.... Figure the odds.....for 2 in 4 hands

Well hey, that's easy when you play "Dr. Pepper" poker!
Redwood is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:52 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.