Len Colby Posted August 7, 2008 Share Posted August 7, 2008 Quick question for Dave and Jack, if Jack correctly ID the corner, where's the pay phone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Carlson Posted August 7, 2008 Share Posted August 7, 2008 The new member-created "Myth debunking" website called De-Fact-o.com is now up and running. http://www.de-fact-o.com/ As a member you can now submit your own articles and, (after your article has been approved) receive updates about how and when it is voted and commented on. You will soon have a profile page that displays your username and avatar and stats on how often your articles are viewed and your overall rating as an author. You can also rate others. It is open to the general public. Start today: http://www.de-fact-o.com/member.php Here is an example of how the Paul Wellstone (DFL-MN) plane crash was handled by De-Fact-o.com: "The FBI was on the scene of Wellstone's plane crash suspiciously early" FALSE http://www.de-fact-o.com/fact_read.php?id=77 -------------------------------- "A distress call should have been heard if Wellstone's plane had experienced trouble" FALSE http://www.de-fact-o.com/fact_read.php?id=57 -------------------------------- "Wellstone's co-pilot gave Zacharias Moussaoui a CD-ROM detailing 747 flight operations" TRUE http://www.de-fact-o.com/fact_read.php?id=19 -------------------------------- "Poor weather conditions brought down Wellstone's airplane" FALSE http://www.de-fact-o.com/fact_read.php?id=48 -------------------------------- Get in on the ground floor and make your case about nearly any topic! Just remember, the site errs on the side of skepticism. A well researched fact-based article is *much* more likely to get approved than a loosely-tied together string of facts supporting a highly speculative "theory". http://www.de-fact-o.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted August 7, 2008 Share Posted August 7, 2008 Citing Dr. Curtis, likely a highly intelligent man, is a non sequitur...comparing HIM toany of the 19 young muslims. Dr. Curtis didn't indicate that he though someone would have to be especially intelligent to hit the targets. Atta was a graduate student at the prestigious Technical University of Hamburg-Harburg, according to his advisor he was “smart” and got a “very very good” grade on his written thesis and the highest possible grade on his oral thesis. Jarrah studied aeronautical engineering at the University of Applied Sciences in Hamburg and “his grades were above average”. I’ve seen no indication the other two pilots were unintelligent. Nor do I see the relevance of their religion. Does Jack believe Muslims are less intelligent than members of other religions? Atta - http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/atta/interviews/machule.htm Jarrah - http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/thepilot/story.html Another non sequitur from Mr. Brazil. The question was whether any of the 19 muslim arab hijackers had ever spent a week learning to fly a 757/767 on a simulator. The non-answer is to present someone saying that someone could do that. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted August 7, 2008 Share Posted August 7, 2008 Jack, You have been asked several times to correct the link to your biography. Please do so within 24 hours or your posts will be made invisible until you have corrected the oversight. To in put a link to your biography: 1. Near the top of the page, on the right hand side, there is a link labeled MY CONTROLS. Click on that. 2. A new page will appear. Go to the left hand side, and look for the heading PERSONAL PROFILE. Under that heading will be a selection labeled EDIT SIGNATURE. Click on it. 3. A text box will appear. Simply paste the URL for your biography into that box, then click on UPDATE MY SIGNATURE at the bottom of the box. We CANNOT do this for you; you have to do it yourself. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted August 7, 2008 Share Posted August 7, 2008 Yes Jack, they did spend time in a 737 simulator which is not unlike the 757 and 767. They also had cockpit diagrammes for the 757 and 767, flight manuals or handling notes for the aircraft, plus PC-based flight simulator programmes for those aircraft. 737 Cockpit 757 Cockpit 767 Cockpit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted August 7, 2008 Share Posted August 7, 2008 Note in those three images the common position and operation of the control yoke, primary flight instruments, FMS (Flight Management System), power levers, flap controls, autopilot system, and VHF communications. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Greer Posted August 7, 2008 Share Posted August 7, 2008 Quick question for Dave and Jack, if Jack correctly ID the corner, where's the pay phone? I've figured out what the problem is. The corner highlighted by Jack is indeed at the intersection of Church and Murray, but it's diagonally opposite from where the engine parts were found. The engine was found at the northeast corner: Jack has highlighted the southwest corner. If Jack doesn't believe me about the location of the engine, he can ask Judy Wood where she thinks it landed. http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/DEW/dew..._engineDrop.jpg Shame, I thought we had a genuine mystery there for a minute! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maggie Hansen Posted August 7, 2008 Share Posted August 7, 2008 The author was less qualified than Hanjour, seems to believe he could have hit the Pentagon. Why should I believe this guys opinion? Others have the opinion that he was a hopeless flyer, qualified or not. He was not able to rent a plane from one airport because they were not confident enough in his flying ability. One of Hanjour's teachers said he could not believe it was him that flew the plane into the pentagon as he just couldn't fly at all. Am I supposed to discount what his teacher said in favour of this guy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Greer Posted August 7, 2008 Share Posted August 7, 2008 Quick question for Dave and Jack, if Jack correctly ID the corner, where's the pay phone? I've figured out what the problem is. The corner highlighted by Jack is indeed at the intersection of Church and Murray, but it's diagonally opposite from where the engine parts were found. The engine was found at the northeast corner: Jack has highlighted the southwest corner. If Jack doesn't believe me about the location of the engine, he can ask Judy Wood where she thinks it landed. http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/DEW/dew..._engineDrop.jpg Shame, I thought we had a genuine mystery there for a minute! Just to make it a little easier to visualise... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted August 7, 2008 Share Posted August 7, 2008 (edited) Maggie, Some of the quotes have been distorted by some people. See what was really said about the hijacker's flying abilities: http://www.911myths.com/html/flight_school_dropouts.html A very important point to note is that they were not being asked to fly precision approaches in bad weather, or deal with inflight emergencies; they simply had to guide the aircraft to a target. Edited August 7, 2008 by Evan Burton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hogan Posted August 7, 2008 Share Posted August 7, 2008 (edited) Maggie wrote: Why should I believe this guys opinion? Others have the opinion that he was a hopeless flyer, qualified or not. He was not able to rent a plane from one airport because they were not confident enough in his flying ability. One of Hanjour's teachers said he could not believe it was him that flew the plane into the pentagon as he just couldn't fly at all. Am I supposed to discount what his teacher said in favour of this guy? (bold added) Evan replied by providing a link and a comment: Maggie, Some of the quotes have been distorted by some people. See what was really said about the hijacker's flying abilities: http://www.911myths.com/html/flight_school_dropouts.html A very important point to note is that they were not being asked to fly precision approaches in bad weather, or deal with inflight emergencies; they simply had to guide the aircraft to a target. From the link Evan provided: "Some of the quote about Hanjour is correct (“I'm still to this day amazed that he could have flown into the Pentagon. He could not fly at all”)." Pretty much just as Maggie stated. The 911myths website offers this as their reference: http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?...hanjourwarnings A quick reading will show that Maggie's concerns were understated. And that her question remains unanswered. Edited August 7, 2008 by Michael Hogan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted August 7, 2008 Share Posted August 7, 2008 Yes Jack, they did spend time in a 737 simulator which is not unlike the 757 and 767. They also had cockpit diagrammes for the 757 and 767, flight manuals or handling notes for the aircraft, plus PC-based flight simulator programmes for those aircraft. 737 Cockpit 757 Cockpit 767 Cockpit As Mr. Brazil might say, provide references for the arabs "spending time in a simulator"; I have studied this since 2001 and have never seen such a reference; I guess I missed it. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted August 8, 2008 Share Posted August 8, 2008 (edited) Mr. Brazil opined that a photo I posted was not of Church and Murray because the buildings are wrong. He does not know the territory. One building has been remodeled since 2001 and the windows coniguration is different. I will be doing a series of studies showing what went on at Church and Murray on 9-11. This is the first. It will take a while to do the others, since I am busy. First, so you know the territory, look at this Google street scene. Jack (error in graphic revised) Edited August 8, 2008 by Jack White Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Lewis Posted August 8, 2008 Share Posted August 8, 2008 Yes Jack, they did spend time in a 737 simulator which is not unlike the 757 and 767. They also had cockpit diagrammes for the 757 and 767, flight manuals or handling notes for the aircraft, plus PC-based flight simulator programmes for those aircraft. 737 Cockpit 757 Cockpit 767 Cockpit As Mr. Brazil might say, provide references for the arabs "spending time in a simulator"; I have studied this since 2001 and have never seen such a reference; I guess I missed it. Jack I already posted it in post number 4. You know, the post where you replied by saying "Giulio Bernacchia was not listed as one of the hijackers and is indeed alive" when it was never claimed that he was a hijacker. Apparently I was correct in wondering if you'd actually read it or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hogan Posted August 8, 2008 Share Posted August 8, 2008 (edited) I see another member had posted similar information, so I withdrew my post. Apologies. Edited August 8, 2008 by Michael Hogan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now