Steve Knight

The truth is never an excuse.

I have (remote) access to the info.....

Thus you admit to being part of the NWO!

lol. I wish. Could do with the funds.

Just my girlfriend working for the Canadian Weather Bureau (Or Met Office, or whatever they call it over there), and her world-wide contacts with people collecting, collating, and analysing the data to produce weather reports.

She says it's a very boring job - sat around doing bugger-all for 50 minutes an hour, then 3 minutes collecting the data, and the rest collating and sending it on to the head office. Nice pay, though, considering how little she does.

Okay, here's the weather data charts for Dallas/Fort Worth area, Sunday 6th March, 2011.

http://i145.photobucket.com/albums/r225/lord_english/Conspiracy/1.jpg

http://i145.photobucket.com/albums/r225/lord_english/Conspiracy/2.jpg

http://i145.photobucket.com/albums/r225/lord_english/Conspiracy/3.jpg

http://i145.photobucket.com/albums/r225/lord_english/Conspiracy/4.jpg

Not sure what good it'll do, but as we know Mr White will never even bother looking for such, and I have (remote) access to the info.....

Edit : swapping uploaded images for photobucket links. As per Announcement on main section page about reduced disk space for uploads.

If I am wrong, produce evidence. Pretty simple. For instance, produce a met report for the date / time at DFW, including altitude data. Produce some METARs, PIREPs, TTF, etc. Pretty simple - why don't you give actual evidence to support your position?

Well, I haven't a clue what any of those are, but luckily, my girlfriend works for the Canadian Weather Bureau, and can get the data for D/FW area for the 6th of March by asking the data collator there for it. I should be able to get screenies by tomorrow.

lol, "Zion".

You should have seen one of the early designs for the logo - "Goatse".

Please don't google that if you don't know what it is. Really not family-orientated.

Slight tangent, but still Murdoch.

http://www.readersupportednews.org/off-site-opinion-section/71-71/4921-fox-news-insider-qstuff-is-just-made-upq

They announced a few weeks ago here, that they want to turn the flagship Sky News channel into "Fox News UK".

Thank the lords it's a pay service, and it's not inflicted on us if we don't want it.

I have seen this clip a few times now and also remain unconvinced. Ten years or so ago, there was a UFO film doing the rounds showing a small disc flying low and rapidly around a field and creating a crop circle in its wake. I took a copy of this to an old friend of mine who is an academy award winning animator --- and I have to say, a convinced UFOlogist. He looked at it, murmured and mumbled, went out to the shops and bought some bottles of wine (naturally) and b the time he got back ten minutes later he had the answer. He went to his mac desktop and fiddled with it for 20-30 minutes and then ran a clip he had created that mimicked the crop circle being made. There was no question in his mind (nor mine since) that he nailed the crop circle clip as a complete fake, as he was able to show how both had been identically fabricated. I contacted the magazine editor who had sent it to me for my opinion and tolf him what had hapened. Although he had the opportunity to publish the truth and show the fake film for what it was, he was not inclined to listen. He unwaveringly believed in UFO's and wanted to believe the film clip.

This particular film still does the rounds and is still widely believed.

Which is what I find exasperating about the whole thing. It's very difficult to separate the possible sightings from the obvious fakes, unless you're willing to review every single piece of evidence yourself - a mammoth task.

To cap it all, there are a number of Youtube's doing the rounds now which are CGI fakes. Very good fakes. It's increasingly possible for bored teenagers to produce good looking "evidence" while sat in Momma's basement, no doubt for their own amusement. It just adds to the flood of false sightings, disinformation and hoaxes that a genuine UFO investigator has to content with. And that means that the likelihod of the baby being thrown out with the bathwater increases.

I had a chat with a friend on this topic some years back. We came to the conclusion that if and when Mr E.T. does finally decide to land on the White House lawn, he'd better not do it on April 1st - no-one's wants to admit they fell for the joke of the century.

~~~

On another note, I'm interested in the Drake equation and the statistical likelihood of other civilisations existing. I'm willing to go out on a limb and say that I'm prety much convinced, purely on a statistical basis, that other "intelligent" civilisations either do exist , or have existed in the past somewhere in the Universe. And very probably somewhere in our own galaxy. There's also the possibility that we may be the first. If others do exist in our galaxy, if they're not within 100 or so light years, they won't even know of our presence unless they stumbled across our planet by chance (I'm thinking of the earliest radio/TV broadcasts). Civilisations may have existed in the past, but been wiped out either through self-destruction, or some cataclysmic event they couldn't escape.

IMO the odds of a highly evolved, technological civilisation existing within easy reach of Earth, at the same time as life on Earth reaching the stage where they can begin to contemplate other life-forms, and even attempt rudimentary communication (SETI etc), are tending toward vanishingly small.

The wiki article on the Drake equation has estimates of N (the number of civilisations in the galaxy that we might hope to communicate with) being anywhere between 2 and 50,000. All depends on what numbers you use to plug into the equation - much of which is based on conjecture. I'd go for the lower end of the spectrum.

I'm pretty much in agreement with Dave, here. The odds of other intelligences in the universe, if not just the galaxy are just too great to ignore. Although some days, I do think we could be "First Ones" as our theories of the life cycle of stars could be just about right for that - 3rd generation star, being formed partially from materials (heavy metals) spewn across the galaxy by the older two generations of stars, giving this system just enough elements to form organics/lifeforms.

However, unless said extra-terrestrial intelligences have access to technologies hundreds if not thousands of years more advanced than ours, the chances of them visiting our remote, isolated, unremarkable sandpit of the galaxy are exceedingly remote. And then they visit only Joe Schmoe in West Bumxxxx, Idaho?? Mutilate a couple of cows? "Draw" patterns in crops?? Well, let's just say that stretches the boundaries of credulity for me. By a long chalk.

I'm more inclined to accept that such things reported as "UFO", and unidentified they may be, are most probably, the results of American industrial/military complex research. If in the last couple of years we've only just found out about the SR91-Aurora plane (Mach 7+, unmanned (mostly)), what have they got buried away so deeply we haven't a clue what it/they are capable of?

Sleep Paralysis? I think I had a couple cases of that in my pre-adolescence.

Twice, that I recall, many years apart, I "woke up" suddenly, with a feeling of heavy dread that someone (or something) was in my room, and I "knew" that if I moved, or made a sound, "it" would know I was there, and "get me".

I don't know if I could have moved, I never tried....but that feeling was present a good few minutes on both occasions, then just faded away. The latter occasion, I was 12, or 13, I asked my parents, and both denied having been in my room during the night.

For those few minutes, I was literally petrified, but nothing happened, and it was only the two occasions. Bizarre now, and I can laugh at it.

Nothing in the 25 years or so since.

Well, aside from Labour stealing some kid's thesis, (Iraq can launch its missiles inside 45 minutes), and passing it off as fact to the House, and the country, Tories would probably also have "gone to war", but I don't believe they'd have been half as rabid as Blair, nor half as brown-tonguing to Bush, as he was.

Iraq invasion was certainly nothing like the Falklands Conflict in the early 1980s for Thatcher and her Tories. Except maybe Blair played Galtieri and Labour were the Argentinian Junta "recapturing" .... no that doesn't work either - Iraq never belonged to the British, nor was invaded/captured/stolen by a foreign power.

Yeah, that's what Labour do : Take everything bad by the Tories, and magnify it ten-fold. At least. When the Tories self-destruct, they don't take the nation with them, just themselves.

Edit : Bring back Screaming Lord Sutch!

Yes, the "unblemished" lawn! The alleged crash has already taken place. But there is no massive pile of

debris from a 100-ton airliner. No wings, not tail, no bodies, no seats, no fuselage. Not even the engines,

which are practically indestructible, were recovered. This photograph is one of the strongest proofs that no

Boeing 757 hit the building. Even though the 767s that purportedly hit the Twin Towers carved their images

in that massive steel-and-concrete structure, the 757 did not even create the outline of its shape on the far

softer facade of the Pentagon, which is made of limestone. Thanks for posting this, Evan! Very well done!

Try "What Didn't Happen at the Pentagon" and pay special attention to the smooth, green, and unblemished lawn as the civilian lime-green firetrucks are extinguishing the modest fires that remained.

Wrong again Jim, and a slight correction. The lime green fire trucks are the standard colour for aviation fire trucks. most often referred to as Oshkosh (from the truck brand name). They are not always green, but most are.

Now, the "unblemished lawn?

Note the vehicle tracks

No plane debris? Are you serious?

http://www.geoffmetcalf.com/pentagon/images/13.jpg

http://911review.org/Wiki/pentagon-rotor.JPG

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRgsnwT8VpQmXO3nF6B2sadQGcQY7jHjH4FqMCf0B_0p2uGabga&t=1

http://media.portland.indymedia.org/images/2004/12/305620.gif

http://fredyz.free.fr/911/debris/rottami.jpg

http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTthap7-B04GgNzSFY9R7cSA0MCFmcG3o4CrPYf3dLNWr7o_0vk9g&t=1

http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/debris.jpg

http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/debris3.jpeg

http://www.oilempire.us/oil-jpg/debris3_engine2.jpg

http://www.oilempire.us/oil-jpg/debris1_wheel.jpg

http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pentagon/docs/punchout_rv.jpg

http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pentagon/docs/mdw_eng01.jpg

http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pentagon/docs/skin_firetruck.jpg

http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/PentagonDebrisMontagecopy1.jpg

and literally hundreds more.

What do the Brits here think about "Red Ed" Milliband?

Does his election as party leader really indicate the party is, a least partially, returning to its roots?

What are the chances of such a young, inexperienced Jewish guy getting elected PM?

What will become of his brother will he remain Shadow Foreign Secretary?

Having partly grown up under Labour in the late 70s and throughout Maggie Thatcher's Tories in the 80s, I can attest I have never liked Labour. "Incompetent" is the kindest word I use against them. Their latest foray into leadership of the country since 1997 only confirms that to me - yet another budgeting FUBAR. Their education policy is ... erratic, at best. Foreign policy an unmitigated disaster. Health and policing policies saw less actual people doing the job, and more filing paperwork for increased salaries. Transport policy I can't really comment on, but seems the same mess it's always been : first sign of snow in the UK, and everything grinds to a halt.

Suffice to say - the sooner the entire Labour party are arrested, charged and tried for treason, crimes against the people, fraud, embezzlement, and acting in the best interests of foreign powers (namely EU and USA), the better the UK will become.

What is now the Lib-Dems used to be two parties that were considered something of a joke. They merged, not because of similar policies overall, but for declining membership and fiscal contributions. Can they do a better job? It's hard to see how they can do worse than the last two Labour governments - Bankrupting, and near-bankrupting the UK.

Tories are, historically, better for the UK - cleaning up Labour's messes, then losing the plot somewhat and making new ones. Tory policies, especially financial/economic ones, are what Labour "borrowed" and used to get elected in 1997, only to throw them out early in the new millennium.

Now, I've nearly always lived in mostly deep-Labour seats, and pretty useless voting against them in those areas - so I've never really voted. I can't see me ever voting Labour in anything. They're just too much anti-everything I believe a UK political party should be.

Another set of 5? I knew they'd found some damaged ones in the mid '90s, but I'm sure this discovery was fairly recent. Mind you, I wasn't really paying attention to it - it was a "documentary" on Ch5, not really a serious channel for documentaries and education, but there wasn't much else on the other channels.

For comparison - they interviewed a pilot who claims to have gone through some sort of space-warp tunnel out east of Miami, and covered something like 250miles in a few minutes...

Oo, didn't I hear they'd found remains of what might be Flight 19 recently?

No, that would be far too obvious and easy for them to do.

That's just a double triskele/-lion. And why the need for so many people? just a handful would be capable of creating it in a short time? And why total darkness? What no moon? What no torches?

In his 1997 book The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark, Carl Sagan discussed alien-based theories of crop circle formation. Sagan concluded that no empirical evidence existed to link UFOs with crop circles.

Many others have demonstrated how complex crop circles can be created.

Scientific American published an article by Matt Ridley, who started making crop circles in northern England in 1991. He wrote about how easy it is to develop techniques using simple tools that can easily fool later observers. He reported on "expert" sources such as the Wall Street Journal who had been easily fooled and mused about why people want to believe supernatural explanations for phenomena that are not yet explained. Methods to create a crop circle are now well documented on the internet.

From the wiki on crop circles. Bolds/underlines are mine for em-far-sees.

Let's look at that first article they mention :

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=crop-circle-confession <= damnit! Americans making circles in Britain!! The dastards!

Consider yourself fooled, Jack! You've been well and truly pranked.

There is absolutely no proof of the extra-terrestrial nor supernatural at play in creation of these patterns, merely bored students and business interests.

I don't know if they ever released videos on YouTube, and I really can't be bothered looking for such, but a large group of students came forward a while back, and showed various news programs how they created them, across the country, with a stick, and various lengths of twine to mark out the circles, and decreasing spirals. Funnily enough, not many crop circles have been reported since in the UK. There's probably reports of it on the BBC website, somewhere.

The farmers whose crops they ruined weren't best pleased with them either.

Totally uninformed. More reports and more complex than ever.

Jack

Wow. Some college kids took a Spirograph to a field. Whoop de doo. It's the same technique : string on a stick, and walk around. then use a slightly shorter string on an offset stick and walk around again. Rinse and repeat. You're so uninformed, but then you are in America, and not Britain, so it's unlikely you'll have seen them confessing on the major news programs. Millions did here, and such are not reported anymore due to "mystery" being over.

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/police-unravel-mystery-of-the-crop-circle-621923.html <- One man arrested and charged for making "crop circles"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/theobserver/2002/feb/10/features.review77

After training as a painter, Dickinson went conceptual in the early Nineties, when, alongside a loose collective of other art-pranksters, he began creating crop circles under cover of darkness in the fields of rural England.

Shock! Horror!

Apparently, there's even money to be made from them - there's at least one business making them for profit.

So, in what way am I uninformed when all the evidence points to fakery and business, while nothing points at supernatural or extraterrestrial?

I don't know if they ever released videos on YouTube, and I really can't be bothered looking for such, but a large group of students came forward a while back, and showed various news programs how they created them, across the country, with a stick, and various lengths of twine to mark out the circles, and decreasing spirals. Funnily enough, not many crop circles have been reported since in the UK. There's probably reports of it on the BBC website, somewhere.

The farmers whose crops they ruined weren't best pleased with them either.

Got a source for this? Because there's nothing in the news, or any news website. (at this time).

Not to mention that pretty much every previous crop circle has been proven to be hoaxed by college/university students.

Edit : Ahh nevermind. Old news. 2009.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/5777580/Mayan-apocalypse-crop-circle-appears-at-Silbury-Hill.html

Definitely students and definitely missing the point of the Mayan Long-Count calendar.

Sorry, couple of corrections : Saratoga was in Puget Sound, Washington State, for the refit, not San Diego.

Enterprise and Lexington were both tasked with transferring planes - one to Wake Island, the other to Midway. Enterprise was scheduled to return to Pearl on the 6th, but bad weather delayed her. She did return during the attack though.

Edit : Correcting the correction. :\

Another part the CTers overlook in stating that proof of conspiracy is the carriers were out of harbour at the attack :

Right up until and immediately after the attack, conventional military wisdom around the WORLD put battleships as capital ships, and carriers as escorts/fast scouts for the battleship fleet. Why protect the escort carriers over the capital ships????

Billy Mitchell argued against this tenet of military faith arduously and to no effect throughout his career and later life. It was only the attack on Pearl that saw the world hurriedly changing their disposition and regarding Battleships obsolete and carriers as Capital ships.

Like most conspiracy theories, once you start looking into their claims, and examine each piece of information in its historical context, the "theories" fall apart rapidly.

Arguably, the cryptographers could have spread their intercepts around a little more (at one point, even the President was removed from the access list of intercepts!!) and the chain-of-command could have included Pearl Harbor in their "WAR WARNING" messages, instead of concentrating their messages on the far east bases - Singapore, Manilla, Philippines, etc. And the two branches, Army and Navy, could have cooperated on breaking, decoding and translating the intercepts, instead of being in direct competition with each other. And the messages too Pearl Harbor could have been more clear, less contradictory, and not told them to avoid rousing the natives in their preparations. The list of "errors and miscalculations" in this saga, that contributed to the Americans unpreparedness is pretty much endless....

Wellllllll, one Carrier, Saratoga, was at San Diego, undergoing a long-needed refit, and had been there some time. One carrier, Lexington, was sent to transfer planes to Midway, in anticipation of attacks there, and Enterprise returned to Pearl DURING the attack, and had to steam south at high speed to get out of range of the Japanese planes, while launching its own planes to help defend.

"Common knowledge" is debatable - Leading wisdom at the time led that the Philippines would be the first major target the Japanese would attack. But yes, many warnings were given from various sources throughout 1941 that the Japanese were up to something, and maybe it involved an attack on American interests, however, as Japanese security on the Pearl Harbor plan was so tight - no radio messages at all : Couriers only, the American SigInt sections had nothing to work with. "They can't attack our fleet, they're not big enough!" was a common refrain. It was really quite comedic : On the one hand, almost at the same time, you had Americans reasoning WHY Japan could not and would not attack them, and on the other hand, the Japanese planning ways around those limitations and blocks.

Unfortunately, I believe, as do many others, the Japanese got the idea of attacking the fleet in harbour due to what we British did to the Italian fleet at Taranto in 1940. 12 WW1 Fairey Swordfish bi-planes attacked, and caused massive damage to the fleet. (Albeit at a high cost in planes and men).

The codebreakers - As I mentioned, the actual attack planning was done under severe communications blackout - everything was done in person, or by the use of military couriers. The Americans only had the diplomatic side to work from, and while they could decode and read the Japanese mail in almost real-time, they had only a few hours after translating the "14-part message" until the attack. (It should be noted that they actually worked faster than the lone Japanese Ambassador in Washington in decoding this message from Japan). Yet, still, the Americans believed the Philippines would bear the brunt of the first attack.

Mitchell - I think you're somewhat confusing things here, to whit : Mitchell resigned his commission not long after his trial, and died in 1936 - long before the events he "prophesised" took place. They named the B-25 Bomber after him, the only US Military plane to bear the name of a person, and indeed, Jimmy Doolittle's raid over Tokyo, in spring 1942, used these planes (although it has to be said, very ineffectively, almost wastefully). Tactically, ineffective. Strategically, overwhelming.

Again, the nature and contents of the American warnings to their bases and commanders were repetitive, and uninformative - "We expect that at some point in the near future, the Japanese will attack some of our forces, somewhere." Expecting the Philippines, and nothing to say otherwise, Short and Kimmel prepared for a saboteur attack from the very high local American-Japanese population.

lol, yeah, almost a full year before the attack, the Peruvian ambassador warned the Americans, they were plotting against them. Ignored for lack of proof. Same could be said about numerous warnings about the Japanese throughout 1941 the Americans "ignored".

How about the Courts-Martial of Billy Mitchell in 1925 where he warned the same thing and was laughed out of court?

http://www.slate.com/id/2280967/?wpisrc=obinsite

Is there anyone more unconvincing in America than Palin? She gives idiots a bad reputation.

Here's a rubber ball, Sarah, now go and bounce it, you moron!

I always thought Short and Kimmel got shafted after the attack, because the information they were given wasn't complete, or stressed as "Immediate" instead of "Important".

It's true, another commander might have done things differently, but you can't really fault them for the actions they did take - based on the information they HAD. They just got really unlucky.

When the smoke cleared, and an assessment made, the fleet didn't really take that much damage - all but two battleships, and a number of smaller ships, repaired and back in battle within a matter of months.

Homer Wallin wrote a fairly good book about his experiences salvaging and repairing the fleet.

Jack, you ignore the fact that a photographic expert from Hasselblad has told you that you are wrong.

All you are doing is trying to smear them, trying to cast aspersions upon the person whilst you have not explained how he is wrong.

If you cannot provide scientific evidence as to why you are right and Mr Pettersson is wrong, then why should we believe you?

Mr Pettersson is the Product Manager and optics expert at Hasselblad. He is know world-wide for his expertise in photography, in particular Hasselblad cameras, and is the primary inventor in at least three photographic patents. His expertise and qualifications are known.

Please prove how he is wrong.

He lies.

That's getting very close to being libellous. Unless you have proof?

Nonsense. The truth cannot be libelous. You are uninformed.

Jack

Really? Please enlighten me! You've called someone, an expert in his field, a xxxx, yet not offered one shred of real proof of that claim, other than your bald statement. Please, show us your proof he is lying!

And while you're at that, there's still the outstanding proofs regarding engines, power outputs and craters from posts #40 and #155, this thread, to regale us with. Ample time has been given for a reply.

Jack, you ignore the fact that a photographic expert from Hasselblad has told you that you are wrong.

All you are doing is trying to smear them, trying to cast aspersions upon the person whilst you have not explained how he is wrong.

If you cannot provide scientific evidence as to why you are right and Mr Pettersson is wrong, then why should we believe you?

Mr Pettersson is the Product Manager and optics expert at Hasselblad. He is know world-wide for his expertise in photography, in particular Hasselblad cameras, and is the primary inventor in at least three photographic patents. His expertise and qualifications are known.

Please prove how he is wrong.

He lies.

That's getting very close to being libellous. Unless you have proof?