|
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. |
29th December 2013, 04:25 PM | #321 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Moss Vale, NSW, Australia
Posts: 7,617
|
|
29th December 2013, 04:30 PM | #322 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 26,122
|
Light weight stuff can survive; it is ignorance of physics and aircraft accident investigation which is the problem with comprehension of why and what happened on 911. Some can't figure it out. Not news, and that is due to lack of knowledge.
Stuff from many passengers made it, upset it ruins the inside job fantasy?. Why spread lies about 911? Are you making 500k/yr like Gage? I thought you said you were a pilot; not knowing about crash dynamics is not a good sign of your experience as a pilot. Physics is why light weight object are ejected in good condition. What happened to the other 3 bandannas? You are full of nonsense. You have a solid record of spreading lies about 911, and you keep going to the next failed idea. Never correcting lies. |
29th December 2013, 04:33 PM | #323 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 493
|
|
29th December 2013, 04:35 PM | #324 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,692
|
|
29th December 2013, 04:36 PM | #325 |
Man of a Thousand Memes
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 6,474
|
David Watts, just out of curiosity just how probable did you think that this thread would go your way?
|
__________________
"There is no special treatment for guns." ~WildCat, confirmed gun owner. |
|
29th December 2013, 05:03 PM | #326 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Republic of Ireland
Posts: 23,499
|
|
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive? ...love and buttercakes... |
|
29th December 2013, 05:06 PM | #327 |
Penguilicious Spodmaster.
Tagger Join Date: May 2005
Location: Ponylandistan Presidential Palace (above the Spods' stables).
Posts: 45,220
|
|
29th December 2013, 06:36 PM | #328 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 6,863
|
Someone needs to post that famous picture from the Titanic wreckage of that tea cup resting on one of the boilers.
Before I get to your explanation you need to understand rural America first. 1. Strangers attract attention. 2. The government attracts suspicion. (Look up Kecksburg, PA/UFO sometime) Nobody's planting anything, nobody's staging anything without some local yokel noticing. They won't know what's going on, but they'll all talk about it. As for bandanna, it's simple : All of the light objects would have been ejected from the cabin in the instant it ruptured from impact. The time between impact and when the fuel ignited would have been more than enough for the bandanna to fly free and clear. Think confetti flying from exploding party favors. |
29th December 2013, 07:00 PM | #329 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 5,497
|
It probably was. Undoubtedly the hijackers bought them new and they were only used for the hijacking.
Quote:
The "explanation" is the hijackers had bandannas. One was recovered after all 19 died in the crashes of four planes. Next "question?" |
__________________
Mister Earl: "The plural of bollocks is not evidence." |
|
29th December 2013, 07:15 PM | #330 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
|
|
29th December 2013, 09:27 PM | #331 |
The Clarity Is Devastating
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Betwixt
Posts: 20,891
|
A bandana is just the kind of thing I would expect to survive and be mentioned in the press. It is a piece of clothing. Like most pieces of clothing, it is made of fabric, which is both highly flexible and durable. You could probably hang 100 pounds from a bandana without tearing it. Yet it weighs only about an ounce. That means that a bandana would not tear under its own weight even if subjected to 1600g acceleration.
Yet, unlike other fabric articles of clothing, like shirts and underwear, a bandana is usually carried or worn in such a way as to be easily separated from the wearer's person, with only a few g's of acceleration or a brief burst of wind. This is important because if a body is subjected to crushing or burning, any clothing that is not separated from the body will be crushed (becoming abraded, blood-soaked, etc.) or burned along with it. If images of the body are withheld from public view due to social conventions, then the clothing that is not separated from the body will also not be in public view. But once separated from the body, a bandana would have a reasonable chance of escaping further damage. So, all in all, I would expect seeing descriptions or photographs of a bandana after a high-velocity impact event with human victims would be much more likely than, say, a pair of boxer shorts. Even though there would probably have been far fewer bandanas present in the first place. (This is not a new phenomenon, by the way. When hats were much more commonly worn, accounts of hats left intact on the scene after accidents -- and even left floating after shipwrecks -- were often a poignant detail mentioned in song and story.) Respectfully, Myriad |
__________________
"*Except Myriad. Even Cthulhu would give him a pat on the head and an ice cream and send him to the movies while he ended the rest of the world." - Foster Zygote |
|
29th December 2013, 10:20 PM | #332 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: I live in a swamp
Posts: 27,712
|
|
29th December 2013, 10:40 PM | #333 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,744
|
Asked and answered several times. Like hundreds of other items of personal effects that you ignore the bandana survived because it is normal in airplane crashes for personal effects to survive. It is only unique or unusual in your world of personal incredulity. Those who understand the nature of aircraft crashes do not find it so.
If you believe otherwise, please explain how they planted dump trucks full of personal effects and plane parts at the Flight 93 crash site with no one noticing. |
__________________
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. |
|
29th December 2013, 10:45 PM | #334 |
Penguilicious Spodmaster.
Tagger Join Date: May 2005
Location: Ponylandistan Presidential Palace (above the Spods' stables).
Posts: 45,220
|
To add to Mark F's comment:
DW, please explain how they planted dump trucks full of body parts, personal effects and plane parts at the Flight 93 and Pentagon crash sites with no one noticing. |
29th December 2013, 11:18 PM | #335 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 5,497
|
Please define "within minutes."
Quote:
Seriously, you had to even ask?
Quote:
Quote:
|
__________________
Mister Earl: "The plural of bollocks is not evidence." |
|
29th December 2013, 11:47 PM | #336 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 4,325
|
Should items be in good condition or burned upon recovery from plane crashes or building collapses?
Here's a sample: Passport of Saeed Alghamdi, not in good shape. Passport of Maynard Spence. Apparently in excellent condition Wallet of Marisa Dinardo, excellent condition. Those items and many more went thru traumatic events, some being damaged and others not. Nobody can ever say which ones should have been more or less damaged, because the exact conditions can never be known. We simply accept them all the way they are as artifacts from a dark and sad day in history. It's ok to leave it at that and mourn those who were killed, and curse the perpetrators. But none of these things will prove or disprove any notion that they were 'planted' by a secret conspiracy. |
__________________
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' |
|
30th December 2013, 02:03 AM | #337 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,692
|
Let me add this from the Bellview Flight 210 crash:
More images with more personal effects that survived here: http://www.onlinenigeria.com/photos/...=39&s=category And since david.watts also asked about the black boxes... After the crash, searchers were unable to find either the voice or flight data recorders.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bellvie...nes_Flight_210 |
30th December 2013, 07:51 AM | #338 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,744
|
The problem I think with david.watts is one shared by many Truthers. They go to conspiracy web sites that talk only about a passport and a bandana and never mention all the thousands of other items that were recovered. With no proper context they think there is something unique and unusual and therefore suspect about these items.
|
__________________
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. |
|
30th December 2013, 08:31 AM | #339 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
|
I am still waiting for an example of an airliner crash for which no personal effects of the occupants were ever found.
This is an important list since it would be important in determining the probability that passports or clothing items(especially such loose garb as a bandana) would survive to be found later. I forget the flight number but there was a 747 cargo aircraft that hit a German apartment building. Slashed right through it and caused the portion it hit to fully collapse to ground level (it was several times wider than the aircraft). I'd be curious as to whether or not the personal effects of the crew (there were no passengers, it a crago craft) were found. |
30th December 2013, 08:49 AM | #340 |
Skeptic not Atheist
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,748
|
|
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley "How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41 |
|
30th December 2013, 09:42 AM | #341 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
|
Well, if crew members were recovered (along with building occupants) then I assume crew member's personal effects were also recovered.
,,, and look:
Quote:
voice recorder unrecovered! Faked aircraft!! Fake! Fake! The accident investigation is in Dutch at http://www.rijksoverheid.nl/minister...erenwaterstaat Can anyone see if it describes recovered crew bodies and personal effects? |
30th December 2013, 10:23 AM | #342 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 4,325
|
I looked into the 1998 Swissair Flight 111 crash, where all 229 passengers and crew died after it plunged directly into the Atlantic Ocean near Peggy's Cove, NS.
Because of the marine nature of the crash it was the costliest aircraft recovery effort in Canadian history, but thru DNA samples all aboard were identified. Many personal effects including wedding bands were collected and returned to families even in this case. Interestingly years later there is now a conspiracy theory brewing involving valuable diamonds and a bomb. I think (after a brief skim) the 'evidence' for the conspiracy rests on slightly raised levels of Mg on some items. Also a red bandana was recovered in almost perfect condition. No, just kidding.. |
__________________
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' |
|
30th December 2013, 10:45 AM | #343 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
|
A good case comparison, in this case one might expect predation to affect body recovery and ocean currents to affect personal effects recovery, which could be analogous to the effect that effect a collapsed building would have in the recovery of personal effects.
However in the El Al 747 case we have a direct analogue to the WTC tower impacts. We have a with 1% the number of occupants as either of the two planes that hit the towers while we also have a much smaller structure that is hit. If such a crash directly affects the possibility of collecting bodies or personal effects then with a plane with only a crew and no passengers one would expect little or no personal effects. The probability would rise with the number of occupants on the aircraft. In this case we see that personal effects of occupants were collected, most from passengers and crew as well as hijackers. In fact only three hijacker passports were recovered including one that was found left behind in an apartment rather than taken on the flight. So that is a 15 % recovery rate for a specific document type. By those odds, and assuming that the Israeli crew all had passports on the flight with them since they were travelling internationally, we have 0.15 X 4 (crew of four) = probability of finding a El Al crew man passport of 0.6 or if you prefer a 1.7 to 1 chance against finding a passport. So the question is, was one of the El Al crew's passports found? If so it beat the odds based on what was recovered in the case of 9/11 crashes. |
30th December 2013, 10:48 AM | #344 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
|
^^ it strikes me that it is rather odd that I and others are undertaking such a task as investigating the odds of finding personal effects. The truther unsupported claim is that it is highly improbable. However they cannot, it seems, be bothered to make that case in any way shape or fashion other than to baldly claim it.
Hardly the way engineers go about their profession, just assuming that if it looks right to them, then it must be right. Of course we see the same thing with FF=CD and with (supposedly) symmetric collapse=CD and with explosions=bombs |
30th December 2013, 10:54 AM | #345 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 24,921
|
As an aside, can I only hope that, while Mr Watts is away for a couple of days, he peruse an introductory text on statistics?
|
__________________
"Reality is what's left when you cease to believe." Philip K. Dick |
|
30th December 2013, 10:55 AM | #346 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 5,497
|
This is why I give CT zero credit on their frequent claims of research. Invariably their "research" turns out to be C&P from others and simplistic repetitions of cherry picked urban legends. It's like a game of telephone, "a bandanna" become "only a bandana" in their mind. I have yet to encounter a CT of any stripe who can present three new bits of evidence or conclusions without regurgitating decade(s) debunked claptrap.
|
__________________
Mister Earl: "The plural of bollocks is not evidence." |
|
30th December 2013, 11:39 AM | #347 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
|
Personally I give them a near zero credit on their frequent claims of research since most of this involves completely unsupported bald assertion devoid of basic research. I say 'near' zero since AE911T is quite willing to accept the musings of carpenters and high school teachers and call it 'research' worthy of an organization comprised of a thousand or more engineers.
|
30th December 2013, 12:00 PM | #348 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,744
|
|
__________________
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. |
|
30th December 2013, 01:11 PM | #349 |
Master Poster
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posts: 2,424
|
Let's try this. How many minutes would it take to make you feel that the event was NOT a false flag?
|
1st January 2014, 07:04 PM | #350 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 293
|
|
1st January 2014, 07:08 PM | #351 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 5,497
|
|
__________________
Mister Earl: "The plural of bollocks is not evidence." |
|
1st January 2014, 07:14 PM | #352 |
Master Poster
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posts: 2,424
|
|
1st January 2014, 07:17 PM | #353 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 293
|
Why "quickly" is a consideration? The guy at the Citgo:
Velasquez says the gas station's security cameras are close enough to the Pentagon to have recorded the moment of impact. "I've never seen what the pictures looked like," he said. "The FBI was here within minutes and took the film." It is like the first thing the FBI did was confiscate the videos. It is a little curious why they wanted to get them within minutes. They did not doubt that a 757 hit the Pentagon, did they? If they did not, why the very first thing would to be confiscate videos of a 757 hitting the Pentagon? Yes, the FBI does investigate. That is what they do. But it is like your mamma taking pictures of your poppa just to prove that he really existed. |
1st January 2014, 07:47 PM | #354 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 293
|
My post #317:
Thank you. All I asked for was what your reasonable explanation was. You gave me one. The FBI collected the videos within minutes because the FBI was close and that is what the FBI does, they collect evidence. I will accept it. Thank you. Thank you for asking the question as to why "quickly" even matters. It made me think some more. I no longer think the explanation given here is reasonable. I therefore retract my acceptance. Ok, maybe the explanation given is not entirely not reasonable, but I have a much more reasonable explanation. Better than the analogy of your mamma taking pictures of your poppa just to prove he really existed. |
1st January 2014, 07:48 PM | #355 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 26,122
|
When the Pentagon was hit it was known by all who knew the WTC was hit twice we were most likely under-attack from terrorists in PLANES, big planes since 175 impact was on video.
I knew when I went to work the terrorist came in planes. If the FBI was not there at the Pentagon in minutes, it means they are the dumbest people on earth. It would take minutes to find witnesses who saw the impact of 77. This is not improbable it is good news, that someone in the FBI can respond timely. When will you remove these lies from the web? http://www.opednews.com/Diary/9-11-H...80324-705.html Failed claims. |
1st January 2014, 08:00 PM | #356 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 293
|
I guess it is good the FBI within minutes was looking for witnesses of their mamma taking pictures of their poppa to prove that he really existed. But they were confiscating videos, not looking for witnesses. Besides, did not the pentagon also have cameras that would have seen the same mamma taking pictures of the same poppa just to prove he really existed?
|
1st January 2014, 08:01 PM | #357 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 5,497
|
That's what you base your claim, anecdotal evidence? Why do CT always seem to take casual/hyperbolic comments as if they were courtroom testimony? Rather than sit in front of your computer, cutting & pasting from wingnut websites, why don't one of you crack research geniuses go interview the CITGO guy and ask him exactly how many minutes 1-60 it took for the FBI to drive across the highway and collect evidence?
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Please feel free to elaborate why you think it odd the FBI would gather evidence? And I notice you very quickly deleted this post, why? |
__________________
Mister Earl: "The plural of bollocks is not evidence." |
|
1st January 2014, 08:14 PM | #358 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 293
|
|
1st January 2014, 08:34 PM | #359 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 5,497
|
|
__________________
Mister Earl: "The plural of bollocks is not evidence." |
|
1st January 2014, 08:39 PM | #360 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 26,122
|
That is a lie, they did interview witnesses. But go ahead, spread more nonsense. Guess what happens after they are done with the video? They give them back, we have access to all of them. oops, FOIA
Why would the Pentagon have video cameras aimed at the air? Good one, that is logic with extra truthy added. RADAR proves 77 hit the Pentagon. FDR proves 77 impacted the Pentagon. DNA found in the Pentagon is proof 77 impacted the Pentagon. Guess evidence is not used when spreading lies about 911. http://www.opednews.com/Diary/9-11-H...80324-705.html See, no evidence, silly claims based on nonsense. |
Thread Tools | |
|
|