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 )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Can Anyone Prove Fema's Aircraft Fuselage Wreckage Landed On Wtc 5?!

questionitall
post Oct 20 2019, 10:17 AM
Post #1





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 106
Joined: 5-October 10
From: Canada
Member No.: 5,337



Throughout the years Matt Nelson (AKA Conspiracy9/11T) and his friend Brian Foster (AKA waypastvne) at International Skeptics Forum have made countless allegations and unsubstantiated claims regarding William F. Baker's [FEMA] one and only official photograph of purported United Airlines Flight 175 fuselage wreckage. [1]

Regardless of either individuals unsubstantiated opinions on that matter I do not believe in the least bit that Popular Mechanics magazines unequivocal statement that Dr. W. Gene Corley, P.E., "was able to track the trajectory of a chunk of fuselage that clearly had passenger windows as it fell from the sky" has any truth to it. Just as I don't believe for a second Corley's unsubstantiated statement that "It's ... from the United Airlines plane that hit Tower 2". Because I've provided more than enough reasons and evidence to the contrary in support my steadfast position on that matter in previous articles and posts.

As such, after recently demonstrating how and why both individuals are flat-out wrong about Baker's [FEMA] lone photograph of purported UA Flight 175 fuselage wreckage not having Photoshopped Mr. Nelson and Mr. Foster have fallen silent on that matter. And yet Mr. Nelson has since counterclaimed that Corley's chunk of fuselage wreckage "flew dead straight for about 500' then started dropping. It made it about 700' north just over the road between the Post Office and WTC7 then drifted with the wind back to WTC5." [2]

So then, while we're waiting for Mr. Nelson to prove that was the case my question is can anyone else actually prove beyond a shadow of a doubt how that wreckage managed to do what Mr. Nelson claims with (only) the NIST Cumulus Dataset videos and photographs as their guide and evidence?

[1] Photograph by Gene Corley taken on 10-25-2001 in New York.jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:FEM...in_New_York.jpg

[2] Matt Nelson: 9/11 Debris - An Investigation of Ground Zero http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forum...ad.php?t=284475
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
questionitall
post Nov 5 2019, 08:21 PM
Post #2





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 106
Joined: 5-October 10
From: Canada
Member No.: 5,337



ADDENDUM
In my previous entry I stated "Mr. Nelson has since counterclaimed that Corley's chunk of fuselage wreckage "flew dead straight for about 500' then started dropping. It made it about 700' north just over the road between the Post Office and WTC7 then drifted with the wind back to WTC5."
That was an error on my part.
In fact it was the grandstanding pathological liar and provocateur Brian Foster (AKA waypastvne) who made that statement, and I will posting my full rebuttal of why everything he's said and claimed to date is patently false in the coming days.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

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: 10th December 2019 - 08:17 PM