IPBFacebook



POSTS MADE TO THIS FORUM ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF PILOTS FOR 911 TRUTH
FOR OFFICIAL PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH STATEMENTS AND ANALYSIS, PLEASE VISIT PILOTSFOR911TRUTH.ORG


DIGITAL DOWNLOADS

WELCOME - PLEASE REGISTER OR LOG IN FOR FULL FORUM ACCESS ( Log In | Register )

16 Pages V  « < 12 13 14 15 16 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Debunkers Respond To Dennis Cimino, A Few Comments Copy & Pasted

elreb
post Apr 3 2012, 09:39 PM
Post #261





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 2,589
Joined: 31-December 07
From: Maui
Member No.: 2,617



QUOTE (Tamborine man @ Apr 3 2012, 02:56 PM) *
Look again in the video and see how the timber poles 'effortlessly' slice through the wing,

Inadvertently, you have “almost” proven that the airplanes were not standard issue.

These critters were special made to cut steel.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tamborine man
post Apr 3 2012, 10:04 PM
Post #262





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 951
Joined: 1-July 07
From: Australia
Member No.: 1,315



Probably the worst case of "video fakery" i have ever seen! Obviously CGI manufactured.

Look from 0:30 onwards. See how small the windows are in relation to the people 'hanging' out of them.

In the actual windows, a fully grown person could with ease stand upright behind the glazing.

Here, it looks like the distance between floors would be no more than around 6 feet - if even that!


The "jumpers" are so obviously faked as well.

Some of them even 'forget' to fall straight down, but instead chooses to 'angle' out from the building!





Cheers

This post has been edited by Tamborine man: Apr 3 2012, 10:08 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mrmitosis
post Apr 3 2012, 10:28 PM
Post #263





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 232
Joined: 11-February 10
From: Australia
Member No.: 4,909



QUOTE (Tamborine man @ Apr 3 2012, 09:04 PM) *
The "jumpers" are so obviously faked as well.


All I can say is that it must take a very sick human being to fabricate their own footage of people jumping to their deaths from the burning WTC. Especially when real videos already exist. I mean, who does that type of stuff for kicks?

Or maybe that's the point you're making Mr Tamborine Man? Do you believe all the footage of jumpers were CGI - not just this one?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
onesliceshort
post Apr 3 2012, 10:48 PM
Post #264



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 2,612
Joined: 30-January 09
Member No.: 4,095



Here's an FOIA released image of floor 47 of WTC1



The windows on some levels were relatively "small".
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mrmitosis
post Apr 3 2012, 10:56 PM
Post #265





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 232
Joined: 11-February 10
From: Australia
Member No.: 4,909



QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Apr 2 2012, 09:07 PM) *
Yes, and the real sad part of it all, is that you were trying to defend Dennis when creating this thread.


Yep - tragic. But also a little bit hilarious. Tragilarious.

I'm telling you right now, NPT and video fakery was the LAST conversational trajectory I expected this topic to follow. Dennis makes absolutely NO MENTION of phantom planes in his article, and yet Fetzer goes from zero to retard in under 5 seconds in his first response on page 1. I seriously doubt that the discussion would have been steered off topic in that way if he'd never posted anything.

If Dennis Cimino and P4T's research does not lead to an NPT conclusion, then Jim should NOT be citing it as supporting evidence for his claims. For all I know, he might have Newton's Laws of Motion on his side when it comes to the tower impacts and what should have happened to the planes. But he should be drawing upon that SEPARATELY, because issues such as the impossible reported speeds clearly have NOTHING to do with it.

People should be encouraged to talk about whatever it is they believe. But it would have been nice if Dennis' arguments and the rebuttals to them were fleshed out a little bit before such radical leaps of logic made an appearance on this thread.

OK, I've had my crybaby2.gif

I'm just sayin'.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Apr 3 2012, 11:24 PM
Post #266



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,745
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (mrmitosis @ Apr 3 2012, 10:56 PM) *
For all I know, he might have Newton's Laws of Motion on his side when it comes to the tower impacts and what should have happened to the planes.


Fetzer does not have Newtons Laws nor any Laws of physics on his side.

As calculated, a Standard 767 would be carrying more than enough energy to cause the damaged observed if such an aircraft could achieve the speeds reported. The key factor here is the speed. Energy increases exponentially as velocity increases. Something Jim Fetzer just cannot comprehend.

Jim does not understand basic physics, math, nor is he able to retain simple data when given to him repeatedly.

The main problem Jim has is that he thinks a modern airliner is more like "an empty coke can", than an actual airliner weighing over 300,000 lbs. He also thinks the entire weight of a stationary structure is a factor when calculating dynamic collisions. He is wrong. This is why he hasn't gotten any support for the past 5 or 6 years attempting to push such theories, and instead has attacked nearly every single person who doesn't subscribe to his theories. There was a mass exodus from Scholars when Jim attempted to pull this crap back in 2006. Does he really think he will gain more support now?

I was basically the last one he had left who respected the fact that he wishes to explore any theory he wants. Most forums have banned NPT discussion. I have told him repeatedly over the years that P4T as an organization does not offer theory nor endorse any theory, this includes NPT. It has been on the top of our home page since 2006.

Jim is upset now because he is trying as hard as he can to find speakers for his upcoming conference. Hence his rapid fire of articles over the past few weeks. Many of the speakers he invited has declined, including myself. So naturally, Jim has no choice but to now write hit pieces attacking me personally.

Jim's credibility is shot within the "movement".

And as you can see from the quotes above, Dennis also does not subscribe to NPT. In the interest of historical accuracy, if anyone would like copies of his emails containing those quotes, feel free to email me and I will forward them to you.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tamborine man
post Apr 3 2012, 11:49 PM
Post #267





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 951
Joined: 1-July 07
From: Australia
Member No.: 1,315



QUOTE (onesliceshort @ Apr 2 2012, 01:48 AM) *
Here's an FOIA released image of floor 47 of WTC1



The windows on some levels were relatively "small".


And then you show me a standard window around 61/2 feet in height, OSS!!

I don't understand??

Cheers
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tamborine man
post Apr 3 2012, 11:57 PM
Post #268





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 951
Joined: 1-July 07
From: Australia
Member No.: 1,315



It appears that Ace Baker has started to get 'serious'.

A welcome change i think.

His unmasking of the 'Purdue fraud' is a Classic!




Cheers
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Apr 4 2012, 12:05 AM
Post #269



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,745
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (Tamborine man @ Apr 3 2012, 11:57 PM) *
It appears that Ace Baker has started to get 'serious'.

A welcome change i think.

His unmasking of the 'Purdue fraud' is a Classic!


Cheers


Didn't Ace Baker off himself on Jim's live broadcast?



Yep, there's a real stable character...lol

(for those wondering why I'm laughing at the guy, it's because the whole thing was a hoax.. Ace staged his own suicide live on air)

Ace stopped by here a few times in the past. He got his ass handed to him. Do some searches.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tamborine man
post Apr 4 2012, 12:32 AM
Post #270





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 951
Joined: 1-July 07
From: Australia
Member No.: 1,315



QUOTE (mrmitosis @ Apr 2 2012, 01:28 AM) *
All I can say is that it must take a very sick human being to fabricate their own footage of people jumping to their deaths from the burning WTC. Especially when real videos already exist. I mean, who does that type of stuff for kicks?

Or maybe that's the point you're making Mr Tamborine Man? Do you believe all the footage of jumpers were CGI - not just this one?



Yes and yes mrmitosis, i,m starting to believe that to be so, after reading and watching this thread

linked to over at LRF, (where i also found the Ace Baker video).

http://letsrollforums.com/further-thoughts...n-b-t27830.html

Hope you at least will give the pages a scroll and a 'glance', if nothing else!

Cheers
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tamborine man
post Apr 4 2012, 12:45 AM
Post #271





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 951
Joined: 1-July 07
From: Australia
Member No.: 1,315



QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Apr 2 2012, 03:05 AM) *
Didn't Ace Baker off himself on Jim's live broadcast?



Yep, there's a real stable character...lol

(for those wondering why I'm laughing at the guy, it's because the whole thing was a hoax.. Ace staged his own suicide live on air)

Ace stopped by here a few times in the past. He got his ass handed to him. Do some searches.


Yes it was quite an immature silly stunt (emphasis on immature) he did in those days.

Looks like he has changed his views dramatically since then, and finally 'grown up'.

So because of this Rob, i hope you'll watch the video to the end!

Cheers
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Apr 4 2012, 01:01 AM
Post #272



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,745
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (Tamborine man @ Apr 4 2012, 12:45 AM) *
Yes it was quite an immature silly stunt (emphasis on immature) he did in those days.

Looks like he has changed his views dramatically since then, and finally 'grown up'.

So because of this Rob, i hope you'll watch the video to the end!

Cheers


I watched about 10 seconds and couldn't tolerate Ace any longer.. .sorry.

With that said, I am not defending the Purdue video. However, based on the calculations I made, the Purdue video does seem plausible considering the amount of energy, especially if the aircraft were modified carrying a higher mass.

I can create the same simulation in my 3D software with it's dynamic collisions generator, which follows all the laws of physics. Although it would take me a really long time. I can assign mass to all objects and structures as well. I am confident that a 767 could cause the damage observed, especially if modified for such an operation. It would have to be modified to achieve the speeds reported as a standard 767 cannot achieve such speeds, as has been demonstrated based on data, precedent and numerous verified experts.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mrmitosis
post Apr 4 2012, 01:20 AM
Post #273





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 232
Joined: 11-February 10
From: Australia
Member No.: 4,909



Thanks for the link Mr Tambo Man.

I have to rush out right now, but I'll have a peruse through tomorrow.

I had a quick look at the video you embedded above - although I'm still not convinced, it does make for interesting viewing.

I had never heard of this Ace Baker character until just now. He's fantastic! Stoners for 9/11 Truth - I love it!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tamborine man
post Apr 4 2012, 02:24 AM
Post #274





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 951
Joined: 1-July 07
From: Australia
Member No.: 1,315



QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Apr 2 2012, 04:01 AM) *
I watched about 10 seconds and couldn't tolerate Ace any longer.. .sorry.

With that said, I am not defending the Purdue video. However, based on the calculations I made, the Purdue video does seem plausible considering the amount of energy, especially if the aircraft were modified carrying a higher mass.

I can create the same simulation in my 3D software with it's dynamic collisions generator, which follows all the laws of physics. Although it would take me a really long time. I can assign mass to all objects and structures as well. I am confident that a 767 could cause the damage observed, especially if modified for such an operation. It would have to be modified to achieve the speeds reported as a standard 767 cannot achieve such speeds, as has been demonstrated based on data, precedent and numerous verified experts.


Hi Rob,

you can just place the arrow on the round dot and drag the video forward almost frame by frame,
while a thumbnail picture keeps changing, showing where you're at within the video.
This way you can avoid all the frames wherein Ace Baker appears in person!!

I have absolutely no doubt, and never had, that a "modified plane" can achieve the speeds you're
talking about. I don't think that anybody else will dispute it either.

It's just that, a person like me, who do not think that a "real plane" impacted the towers, obviously
would not put too much importance upon this same 'speed', as you would; and others who also
believe that a real plane entered the facades.

The silly thing is though, that while you would use this 'speed' to prove the presence of real planes,
i, on the contrary, would use the same 'speed' to try to prove the 'impossibility' of any real planes
being used, and which i've been trying to do already, previously.

As none of us can persuade the other, all we can do is, in a friendly way, to present each our case
and let others make up their own minds and their own judgements as they see fit.

I'm totally on line with the fact, that this debate is hold completely apart from and outside of
'Pilots For 9/11 Truth Forum policy statements' - of which i respect, and will never violate.

Cheers
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
onesliceshort
post Apr 4 2012, 08:46 AM
Post #275



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 2,612
Joined: 30-January 09
Member No.: 4,095



QUOTE (Tamborine man @ Apr 4 2012, 04:49 AM) *
And then you show me a standard window around 61/2 feet in height, OSS!!

I don't understand??

Cheers


TM,

I'm sure there were windows where only the top half could be opened for safety reasons, no?

I was going to look for more images but I'm tired of being an errand boy.

Third time asking mate, what do you make of the impact photo I posted?

And why would they bother to "fake" people jumping from the towers??
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
amazed!
post Apr 4 2012, 09:23 AM
Post #276





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 4,017
Joined: 14-December 06
From: Fort Pierce, FL
Member No.: 331



Point very well made TM!

Yes, just as the wing was 'shredded' by wooden light poles, I say the entire airframe was 'shredded' by the large stainless steel shredder that was the exoskeleton of the towers.

Great find!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
onesliceshort
post Apr 4 2012, 09:30 AM
Post #277



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 2,612
Joined: 30-January 09
Member No.: 4,095



QUOTE (amazed! @ Apr 4 2012, 02:23 PM) *
Point very well made TM!

Yes, just as the wing was 'shredded' by wooden light poles, I say the entire airframe was 'shredded' by the large stainless steel shredder that was the exoskeleton of the towers.

Great find!


biggrin.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Apr 4 2012, 10:50 AM
Post #278



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,745
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (Tamborine man @ Apr 4 2012, 02:24 AM) *
The silly thing is though, that while you would use this 'speed' to prove the presence of real planes,


We aren't using the speeds as "proof" of anything. We are saying that the speeds reported do not support the govt story.

The govt story does not add up.

Unlike Shanksville and the Pentagon, there is ample amount of evidence which shows real planes caused the impact damage at the WTC. There is no evidence to prove that the aircraft observed to cause the damage were N334AA and N612UA. In fact, the evidence provided by govt sources contradict their own claims.

This is one of the many reasons why P4T is calling for a new independent investigation.

Again, people are free to explore any theory they want. But extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

This is why we as an organization do not offer theory. How could we when we don't have subpoena power to examine all the evidence, such as aircraft parts recovered, calling witnesses under oath.. etc.

This is why our Mission Statement has not changed since 2006.

As I have stated before, we have many varying opinions within our organization. John Lear for instance believes holograms were used and is one of our Core members in good standing. However, this cannot be proven until someone shows us the Hologram machine used, operates it, and even then, they would have to prove it was used on 9/11.

This is what a Jury will require. This is what society will require. This is why NPT has not gained any support in 6 years and has done nothing but divide the "movement" while providing ammo for those who want to paint anyone who questions the govt story on 9/11 as lunatics.


John remains a Core member as he is united with us under our Mission Statement and is more than qualified to discuss our work. However, he does not use our work to further his theories. As explained in this short interview.







QUOTE
i, on the contrary, would use the same 'speed' to try to prove the 'impossibility' of any real planes
being used, and which i've been trying to do already, previously.


If you feel evidence is fake, you cannot use it as evidence to prove your case. This is a classic logical fallacy. These are just some of the reasons evidence is tossed from a Court Of Law every day.

Imagine a Prosecutor attempting to prove his case using evidence which he felt was faked.

"Ladies and Gentleman of the Jury, yes that man was shot. Here is the gun, it is made of wax"

It's absurd.

Furthermore, if the WTC impacts were faked, why weren't videos fabricated for the Pentagon and Shanksville?


I am not sure what the ultimate goal of the NPTer's is, but the more I research it, and through discussion over the years, the more I feel it is a concerted disinformation campaign used as a red herring to bury good evidence, evidence which can and will be used in an a new investigation, if one were to be taken seriously.

Perhaps this is the goal of NPTer's? As others have stated in the past... perhaps the motivation for NPT is to make such ludicrous claims that any attempt to get the ball rolling on a new investigation will be stopped before it even gets started.

QUOTE
As none of us can persuade the other, all we can do is, in a friendly way, to present each our case
and let others make up their own minds and their own judgements as they see fit.


I agree, start with providing us the Hologram Machine, then reproducing the effects observed on 9/11, then prove it was used on 9/11.

Again, this is what a Jury will require.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tamborine man
post Apr 4 2012, 11:24 AM
Post #279





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 951
Joined: 1-July 07
From: Australia
Member No.: 1,315



QUOTE (onesliceshort @ Apr 2 2012, 11:46 AM) *
TM,
I'm sure there were windows where only the top half could be opened for safety reasons, no?


This might be the case (i don't know), but that's not what we see in the video.
Here we see people leaning out over the spandrel plates that covers the ledge
and the box behind. We see further that the spandrel plates to the floors above
are positioned very close the heads of the 'leaning out' people.

QUOTE
Third time asking mate, what do you make of the impact photo I posted?


I've already answered you in my posts 258 and 260!!

QUOTE
And why would they bother to "fake" people jumping from the towers??


All i can say really, is that i personally got the answers to that question by
reading about the 'Gelatin B team', and related topics.

Cheers
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
elreb
post Apr 4 2012, 02:01 PM
Post #280





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 2,589
Joined: 31-December 07
From: Maui
Member No.: 2,617



More on the WTC Gelatin project, in the form of a sales blurb for the book:

The only legitimate proof of [the] activity is a piece of chewing gum placed by the group, stuck to the exterior of the building at a perilous height. (Art Monthly)

The Austrian collective, Gelatin, has gained an international reputation for ambitious projects that thrive on surprise and hyper-real bodily sensation. Each project pushes physical boundaries and audience expectations.

The B-Thing uncovers the truth behind the rumours of Gelatin's construction of an improvised balcony on the 91st floor of the World Trade Centre in New York in 2000. Through preparatory notes written by the boys, diagrams and colour photographs, we are finally able to glimpse the pink sunrise over New York from Gelatin's eyes and to see how their home-made balcony emerged like a 'pimple on the building's eelslippery face.'

The rumours continued however and Moukhtar Kocache, Director of Visual Art and Media at the WTC, felt the need to deny that the action ever took place, claiming that any documentation 'simply demonstrates [Gelatin's] art of deception.' Although he praised their success 'in addressing the mythological and iconic dimensions of America, New York and the Twin Towers,' and continued, '[they] use the system of the art world, a system they love to critique as a vehicle ... And because they are boys and like to play ...'

Suddenly, on 11 September 2001, this playful project became an historic document.

The Gelitin (note the spelling difference) website: www.gelitin.net

The Gelitin B-Thing page: http://www.gelitin.net/mambo/index.php?set...a6ce3b4f7a916c6

Curioser and curioser.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

16 Pages V  « < 12 13 14 15 16 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 




RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 14th October 2019 - 09:49 PM