Is anyone interested in Apollo missions...

[Len Colby]

Colby is a HOLOCAUST DENIER...BUT OF A DIFFERENT HOLOCAUST...the one perpetrated on 911.

Thanks to Colby for calling to our attention that SID WALKER is a member of the highly respected PHYSICS 911 group which opposes disinformation like Colby presents. Here are the other members of the 911 group:

Membership on the S.P.I.N.E. Panel is determined by professional status and area.

Current Members include:

Walter E. Davis Social & Human Health Theorist Member

A. K. Dewdney Mathematician, Computer Scientist, Biologist Member

John DiNardo Physics Teacher Member

Derrick Grimmer Physicist Member

Jim Hoffman Physician, Engineering Background Member

Eric Huffschmid Software Developer Member

Joseph D. Keith Aeronautical Engineer Member

Tim Howells Computer Scientist Member

Jerry Longspaugh Aeronautical Engineer Member

Scott Loughrey Computer Programmer Member

Brad Molineux Cellphone Engineer Member

Sid Walker Webmaster & Editor Member

Not only is Jack a pround member of the 911 Revisionist movement but he seems proud to be associated with Holocaust Revisionists like Huffschmid and Walker. The two movments have a few parallels they both: 1) challenge accepted history backed by the overwhelming consensus of all qualified experts to have studied those events 2) count among their ranks people with impressive credentials in fields not directly related to their controversial findings including academics and politicians. 'Prominent' Holocaust revisionists include:

Academics – Arthur Butz, a professor of electrical engineering at Northwestern University (one of the top schools in the US),

Robert Faurisson, the former head of the literature dept. of the Université de Lyon,

Jane Christensen the only professor of political science at North Carolina Wesleyan College

Politicians – Mahmoud Ahmadinejad – President of Iran, former mayor of Tehran,

Jorg Haider – Former Austrian state governor and governing coalition member

David Duke- Former Louisiana state representative and candidate for Senator, President and Congress

Etc.

There is also as previously noted considerable overlap between the two revisionist movements (Dr. Christensen is also an 911 revisionist)

SPINE like ST911 would be more impressive if it's members actually had relevant credentials, they seem to take any one with a college degree.

"He also tries his hand at political correctness by using the inaccurate term AFRICAN-AMERICAN.

[…]

"African-American" is a meaningless term made up to mollify descendants of former slaves, most of whose DNA is only a SMALL FRACTION Negro, often as little as one sixty-fourth. Slavery was an abomination of an era not completely civilized. But the word Negro is not an abomination."

What term would WHITE prefer I use? African-American is the tern preferred by most African-Americans. By his own logic the term Negro would also be inaccurate and most African Americans would consider use of the term Negro archaic if not offensive. Perhaps he can cite a study showing that a majority of African Americans' "DNA is only a SMALL FRACTION Negro"

"Not all Africans are NEGRO (Spanish) or BLACK (English)".

Thanks for telling us the obvious Jack, but the vast majority of Africans are Black.

"South African (mostly WHITE)"

WHITE really showed his ignorance with that one the population of South Africa is overwhelmingly Black..

Len

Edited October 10, 2006 by Len Colby

[Jack White]

Colby believes a holocaust happened only to Jews, but not to New Yorkers.

I believe that both horrible events occurred...perpetrated by politicians against

their own people.

Jack

[Len Colby]

What a ridiculous straw man from Jack.

I never asserted or implied the Nazi Holocaust was exclusively or primarily Jewish? As I pointed out elsewhere estimates of Jewish victims is in the 5 – 6 million range and total victims in the 10 – 14 million range. Victims also included Roma (Gypsies), Homosexuals, Leftists, trade union leaders, and the mentally and physically handicapped.

Nor of course do I deny that thousands of people were murdered in NYC, Washington and Shanksville on 9/11. The dispute of course is over who is responsible. The 9/11 revisionists have yet to produce any credible evidence of an “inside job” which is why they so often resort to lies, distortion and straw men to bolster their case.

[Randy Downs]

Mr. White, you stated that "cell phone calls from flight 98 would be scientificly impossible". I've never had a cel phone, and i find that a very intriguing statement. Could you expound on that please?

Also i notice that your wording specifies the one plane; how would that be different from the other planes?

Regards,

Randy

[Jack White]

Mr. White, you stated that "cell phone calls from flight 98 would be scientificly impossible". I've never had a cel phone, and i find that a very intriguing statement. Could you expound on that please?

Also i notice that your wording specifies the one plane; how would that be different from the other planes?

Regards,

Randy

Randy...Flight 93 is the only one of the four flights from which CELL PHONE calls

were allegedly made. Two of the other flights also had one call each, but from

AirFones instead of cell phones. Cell phone calls are impossible from planes

at high speed and high altitude because of "handshake" technology. For

details go to:

http://www.physics911.net/cellphoneflight93.htm

The AirFone calls were alleged to be made from onboard radio phones.

One was from Barbara Olson to her husband; it was alleged to be a

collect call...but would have been charged to her credit card, and no such

call was charged. The other was made by flight attendant Betty Ong on one

of the WTC flights who made absurd comments like..."migod, I see water,

I see buildings" just before the crash. It would be more probable she should

have said "we are over New York City".

The difference...AirFones use short wave radio and are operated by the

Airlines. Cell phones use ground towers spaced close together, and a plane

going too fast or too high cannot utilize the multiple towers.

The article cited will answer all your questions.

Jack

[Randy Downs]

Mr. White, you stated that "cell phone calls from flight 98 would be scientificly impossible". I've never had a cel phone, and i find that a very intriguing statement. Could you expound on that please?

Also i notice that your wording specifies the one plane; how would that be different from the other planes?

Regards,

Randy

Randy...Flight 93 is the only one of the four flights from which CELL PHONE calls

were allegedly made. Two of the other flights also had one call each, but from

AirFones instead of cell phones. Cell phone calls are impossible from planes

at high speed and high altitude because of "handshake" technology. For

details go to:

http://www.physics911.net/cellphoneflight93.htm

The AirFone calls were alleged to be made from onboard radio phones.

One was from Barbara Olson to her husband; it was alleged to be a

collect call...but would have been charged to her credit card, and no such

call was charged. The other was made by flight attendant Betty Ong on one

of the WTC flights who made absurd comments like..."migod, I see water,

I see buildings" just before the crash. It would be more probable she should

have said "we are over New York City".

The difference...AirFones use short wave radio and are operated by the

Airlines. Cell phones use ground towers spaced close together, and a plane

going too fast or too high cannot utilize the multiple towers.

The article cited will answer all your questions.

Jack

Thank you for the info..

Is it just me, or are the ramifications of this stunning? Is this not widely known? I'm a good researcher, and i've not heard a whisper of this. I'm not sure which disturbs me more.

Randy

[Jack White]

Mr. White, you stated that "cell phone calls from flight 98 would be scientificly impossible". I've never had a cel phone, and i find that a very intriguing statement. Could you expound on that please?

Also i notice that your wording specifies the one plane; how would that be different from the other planes?

Regards,

Randy

Randy...Flight 93 is the only one of the four flights from which CELL PHONE calls

were allegedly made. Two of the other flights also had one call each, but from

AirFones instead of cell phones. Cell phone calls are impossible from planes

at high speed and high altitude because of "handshake" technology. For

details go to:

http://www.physics911.net/cellphoneflight93.htm

The AirFone calls were alleged to be made from onboard radio phones.

One was from Barbara Olson to her husband; it was alleged to be a

collect call...but would have been charged to her credit card, and no such

call was charged. The other was made by flight attendant Betty Ong on one

of the WTC flights who made absurd comments like..."migod, I see water,

I see buildings" just before the crash. It would be more probable she should

have said "we are over New York City".

The difference...AirFones use short wave radio and are operated by the

Airlines. Cell phones use ground towers spaced close together, and a plane

going too fast or too high cannot utilize the multiple towers.

The article cited will answer all your questions.

Jack

Thank you for the info..

Is it just me, or are the ramifications of this stunning? Is this not widely known? I'm a good researcher, and i've not heard a whisper of this. I'm not sure which disturbs me more.

Randy

You are like most people; you do not know because the media

suppresses the information. The cell phone calls are impossible,

indicating govt lies.

Google CELL PHONE CALLS 911 and you will find lots more info.

Jack

[Evan Burton]

Avionics: Were cell phones used in violation of the rules?

Strauss: I was able to specifically identify eight signals that were cellular calls in flight. Some were at very high altitude, which is technically not possible, according to most cell phone manufacturers. They say calls can't be made that high. Well, we found differently.

Now, did those calls hold for minutes? Probably not. But were they completed? Yes. Calls actually were initiated at, for example, 7,000 feet, 12,000 feet, 18,000 feet and two at 35,000 feet.

http://www.avionicsmagazine.com/cgi/av/sho...amp;file=qa.htm

Further to 411A's non scientific but otherwise valid test. I've been in a Challenger with at least 3 phones in use. Miracle - we're still alive, I think!

I have also received calls from the Flt Deck - before we got Satfone fitted

There's loads of anecdotal "evidence" but no hard facts

Simply boils down to cost. It's easier to ban than test - until now, when theres money to be made!

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showpost.php?...mp;postcount=23

Had you took the time to read the whole thread (this means one comes trying to learn something beside his teching of his own), you would have learn that is totally unproven, that now or ever, the cellphone network can get trouble from fast moving handsets.... The flying handset, believe me, is the last of their concerns.

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showpost.php?...mp;postcount=38

On a flight from Hong Kong to Dubai in a 747 (about 2 years ago) I forgot to turn the phone off. On landing in Dubai I pulled the phone out and had a SMS message welcoming me to Bombay! We must have been up at about FL310'ish and passed within visual range of Bombay.

It may be unusual to get reception but I certainly had it that night.

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showpost.php?...mp;postcount=48

[Len Colby]

Uuuum flight 93 (not 98) this question and your one about Thierry Meyssan reveal that you really haven’t looked into 9/11, that hasn’t stopped you from reaching a conclusion though now has it?

The whole cell phone brouhaha is more nonsense from the truth movement as Evan has already gone a good ways towards showing. (FL310 = about 31000 feet)

1) We don’t know how many of the calls from flight 93 were made with cellphones and how many were made with AirPhones, there are only a handful of cases where they were definitely made from cellphones.

2) We don’t know what altitude the plane was at when the calls were made.

3) The “study” Jack linked to is invalid for two reasons. A) The author never carried out tests above 8000 although his plane was capable or reaching 13,500. At that altitude his success rate was between 5 and 13.3%. I totaled the number of attempted and successful calls he reported (84 and 8 respectively) which results in an average 9.5% success rate (see table below). More than high enough to explain the calls if we assume that the vast majority of passengers had cellphones and would try to reach their loved ones. The author simply extrapolated lower success rates at higher altitudes, why he didn’t take the plane to it’s ‘ceiling’ or charter a plane capable of higher altitudes is never explained the tests were conducted over London, Ontario not anywhere near the flight paths of the hijacked planes. http://www.physics911.net/projectachilles.htm

For more http://911myths.com/html/mobiles_at_altitude.html and http://911myths.com/html/calls_faked.html

One question that remains unanswered by the 9/11 revisionists is, if cell calls were impossible and all four planes had AirPhones why would they fake cell phone calls?

Len

Attempted calls – successful calls (%) at 8000 feet

1st test 12 1 (8.3 {not 1.8 as he reportedis this guy really a math professor?})

2nd 15 -2 (13.3)

3rd 20 -1 (5)

4th 12 -1 (8.3)

5th 35 -3 (8.6)

Total 84 -8 (9.5)

Edited October 11, 2006 by Len Colby

[Len Colby]

I was mistaken when I said the altitude of the plane was not known. Although it was widely reported that flight 93's FDR was too damaged to recover any data some information was retrieved including the pressure altitude. Pressure altitude as its name implies is based on barometric pressure and may vary from actual altitude (I'll ask Evan to explain further). According to the FDR the 757 started flying below 20,000 feet at 9:45 and below 10,000 feet at 9:55 [1]. During its last few minutes the plane was flying through mountainous terrain. Johnstown Airport which is about 20 miles from Shanksville and was close to the flight path [2] is at nearly 2300 feet [3]. Pittsburg, which the plane also flew close to, and Youngstown, which is about where the plane was at 9:45 if the map below is accurate, are at about 1200 feet [4]. Thus the plane was at about 8000 feet (the altitude at which he nearly had a 10% success rate) above ground level or less for the last 8 minutes and at about19,000 feet or less for the 10 previous minutes. What Dewdney failed to take into account is that cellphone base stations in rural areas over which the plane was flying are fewer and farther between and thus use more power and consequentially have more range than in urban areas like London, Ontario [5] and it has been suggested that older technology cellphones would have had a better chance of getting through than newer ones [5].

http://www.post-gazette.com/images2/20011028Flight93map.jpg

Len

1] http://www.ntsb.gov/info/UAL93FDR.pdf bottom of pages 17 – 38, these pages seem to repeat the same info can Evan or anyone else explain)

2] http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20011028flt93mainstoryp7.asp , http://maps.yahoo.com/dd_result?newaddr=&taddr=&csz=johnstown%2C+pa&country=us&tcsz=shanksville%2C+pa&tcountry=us

3] http://airnav.com/airport/KJST

4] http://airnav.com/airport/KPIT , http://airnav.com/airport/KYNG

5] http://911myths.com/html/ak_dewdney_and_project_achille.html

Edited October 11, 2006 by Len Colby

[Jack White]

Read about it at:

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/flight_9...surisation.html

Jack

[Evan Burton]

Flight Data Recorders (FDR) record altitude information as Pressure Altitude. As the name suggests, this is altitude above a pressure datum, not actual altitude (or altitude Above Ground Level - AGL). It's calibrated to read Above Mean Sea Level (AMSL), which uses the International Standard Atmosphere (ISA) - 1013.2Mb / 29.92inHg and +15 degrees C.

So the FDR might read 3000 feet pressure altitude. The terrain underneath the aircraft might be 2700 feet high, so in fact you are only 300 feet AGL. That's why the pilots put in the QNH (pressure) to the altimeter; it corrects the altitude. Even so, the QNH has to be accurate and the altimeter has errors which must be allowed for.

The FDR altitude information comes from static ports on the sides of the aircraft, which is then fed through an Air Data Computer (ADC) to a data management & distribution system, and then to the FDR. This system corrects for a number of errors (such as temperature) but even so the system can be up to +/- 450 feet in error.

[Evan Burton]

Today a light aircraft hits an apartment building in New York.

What were the witnesses saying?

"It was like a bomb went off.."

The aircraft was only a lighty, not much fuel, the aircraft fell to the ground, and yet the fire took some 45 minutes (by initial media reports) to be brought under control / extinguished (it doesn't make clear which as yet).

Guess those CT mills will be working overtime trying to explain that. Or perhaps they'll claim it was a setup to try and 'prove' the WTC fires, etc.

Come on, Jack, Peter, John Mc - it wasn't an accident, was it? The gubmint did it, right?

[Steve Ulman]

FYI-

The plane Cory Lidle was in was a Cirrus SR-20.

Max Gross Weight = 3,000 lbs.

Usable Fuel Load = 56 gallons (US) / 336 lbs.

Full specs here.

[Len Colby]

The WRH article quotes an article by William Bunch "Relatives later reported they heard sounds of an on-board struggle beginning at 9:58 a.m., but there was a final "rushing sound" at 10:03, and the tape fell silent." Which is rather ambiguous and he never cites his source. None of the relatives he interviews says anything of the sort. http://www.propagandamatrix.com/three_minute_discrepency_in_tape.htm . Nor have I seen anything of the sort mentioned in any of the other press accounts of relatives who heard the tape. Also as the good Dr.Fetzer points out the mikes for the CVR don't pick up sounds from the cabin and when planes are shot down the heat seeking missiles would hit the engines not the fuselage. Another problem with the theory is that "inside jobbers" normally claim the tape was faked and as Ron can attest none of the witnesses on the ground reported a hole in the fuselage of the plane appearing to have been shot down.

The WRH piece also quotes another article by Bunch in which the mayor of Shanksville said: ""I know of two people - I will not mention names - that heard a missile," Stuhl said. "They both live very close, within a couple of hundred yards. . .This one fellow's served in Vietnam and he says he's heard them, and he heard one that day." The mayor adds that based on what he knows about that morning, military F-16 fighter jets were "very, very close."

OK so we have second-hand accounts from the same source of people hearing, as opposed to seeing a missile, and F-16s being close by, things not reported by any EYEwitnesses. The author of the WRH article left out this quote from the article "And, when you ask Stuhl for his theory of what caused the jetliner to crash that morning, he will give you the prevailing theory - that a cockpit battle between the hijackers and burly, heroic passengers somehow caused the Boeing 757 to spiral out of control. "There's no doubt in my mind that they did put it down before it got to Washington and caused more damage," he said."

The WRH article also quotes this from the Pittsburg Gazette "…investigators… widened their search area today following the discoveries of more debris, including what appeared to be human remains, miles from the point of impact at a reclaimed coal mine". "Appeared o be", not very conclusive, I know of no other accounts of supposed human remains miles from the crash site. And the following paragraphs make it unclear if it was the supposed human remains as opposed to paper that was found miles away.

Residents and workers at businesses outside Shanksville, Somerset County, reported discovering clothing, books, papers and what appeared to be human remains. Some residents said they collected bags-full of items to be turned over to investigators. Others reported what appeared to be crash debris floating in Indian Lake, nearly six miles from the immediate crash scene.

Workers at Indian Lake Marina said that they saw a cloud of confetti-like debris descend on the lake and nearby farms minutes AFTER hearing the explosion that signaled the crash at 10:06 a.m. Tuesday.

Somerset County Coroner Wallace Miller said that, at the same time, the first human remains have been removed from the site in a prelude to the somber challenge of identifying the 45 victims of the crash. http://post-gazette.com/headlines/20010913somersetp3.asp

As for the report that a passenger reported smoke and an explosion to a 911 operator. Its souce was not the operator who took the call but rather his supervisor. The operator and the passengers brother who heard the tape say it's not true. http://911myths.com/html/explosion_and_smoke.html

Len