Take the Boeing 757 Challenge! (non-troll thread)

[killtown]

(My original thread (http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=58441) got infested with trolls, so the mods closed it. Here's the non-troll thread version, so no trolls allowed!)

http://img259.imageshack.us/img259/1478/theboeing757challenge.jpg (http://hoodwinkedatshanksville.blogspot.com/2009/03/boeing-757-challenge.html)

http://hoodwinkedatshanksville.blogspot.com/2009/03/boeing-757-challenge.html

[helloperator]

Awesome music

[killtown]

Awesome music
Thanks! It's funny, which ever music you choose, some will express they like it, some will express they hate it.

Btw, did you pass the challenge?!

[dave52]

This is a nice little vid KT - well done! I think it sums up the Shanksville thing pretty well. I can see why the other thread got shut down, the interesting thing is, with regards to no planes at Shanksville or the Pentagon, most people are pretty cool with it, but this very fact does seem to send *some* members off the chart...

[limelady]

The original version of this thread has been re-opened and ranted.

Please keep this thread civil and free of personal insults or they will be moved to the ranted version.

Thankyou. :)

[helloperator]

Of course I did not pass the challenge.

[john white]

I declare I have won Killtown's "challenge"

To show otherwise he must address the following:

"Where do you dis-agree with the following statement? Be clear and specific"


All that is required is to state that the evidence supporting the claims of the 9/11 Commission regarding Shanskville and the Pentagon is weak and unsubstantiated, and therefore demands thorough and transparent investigation to establish the full facts, as part of a full and vigerous investigation of the treason behind 9/11, with the prosecution of the traitors, and all who have aided and abetted them

Failure to show rational disagreement or resorting to hiding behind words like trolling is admission your challenge has been answered and your purpose is defeated

[bryan]

Don't forget to report the trolls, people.

[helloperator]

I don't get it. Killtown says no plane at Skanksville...john white....are you disagreeing? You believe there was a crashed plane at the site?

[john white]

I don't get it. Killtown says no plane at Skanksville...john white....are you disagreeing? You believe there was a crashed plane at the site?

You need to read this link

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=883886&postcount=55

[dave52]

Yes, that's some nice vitriol John. But let's keep on subject here. And that subject is Planes / No Planes at Shanksville. I think KT has put forward a pretty good case for No Planes at Shanksville.

What do you think with regards to that specific question...?

[john white]

Yes, that's some nice vitriole John. But let's keep on subject here. And that subject is Planes / No Planes at Shanksville. I think KT has put forward a pretty good case for No Planes at Shanksville.

What do you think with regards to that specific question...?

You need to read this link

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showp...6&postcount=55

[3stepsahead]

You need to read this link

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showp...6&postcount=55

Which Killtown is working hard to have censored

error 404 plane not found:rolleyes:

[john white]

error 404 plane not found:rolleyes:

Lol try this one

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=883886&postcount=55

[3stepsahead]

Sorry but it does not say anything other than
regardless of what happened in shanksville the wtc supposedly has real planes.

and you need to speak common so that we dont have to skip your posts just cause its unreadble.

and now back to this thread.
why is there no plane at the crash site?

[dave52]

You need to read this link

I did, that's why I used the word "vitriol".

Can you answer the question John, Plane at Shanksville - Yes or No...?

[john white]

I did, that's why I used the word "vitriol".

Can you answer the question John, Plane at Shanksville - Yes or No...?

The answer is in the post you were directed to

Unfortunately, it would seem I cannot restate that answer here at the present time, so perhaps you would direct your question to the other thread where I can make a direct response

[john white]

Sorry but it does not say anything other than
regardless of what happened in shanksville the wtc supposedly has real planes.

and you need to speak common so that we dont have to skip your posts just cause its unreadble.

and now back to this thread.
why is there no plane at the crash site?

Perhaps you are having trouble reading what you do not want to accept as true. That does not effect what is true in anyway of course

[helloperator]

Never mind...you said inconclusive.

Any leaning?

Now here you come along, as we both know, a fraudster, and your interest is in splitting, misdirecting and dis-informing the 9/11 Truth movement. Also, as you know, you have faked a cock and bull story and pimped it on a full time professional basis across the internet

I would argue that killtown believes what he is saying. He doesn't seem to have an agenda to misdirect. He seems sincere. Is he correct? Are you?

[helloperator]

What's your take on the 'melting wings' at the wtc John?

[john white]

What's your take on the 'melting wings' at the wtc John?

Video interlacing, combined with selective manipulation of frame rates and resolution, reducing the available information in the footage presented as "proof", which is then claimed to show "melting"

In "speak common", effectively an act of forgery

[dave52]

Video interlacing, combined with selective manipulation of frame rates and resolution, reducing the available information in the footage presented as "proof", which is then claimed to show "melting"

In "speak common", effectively an act of forgery

What about the fact that the tail doesn't snap forward as the front of plane slows due to resistance...? No amount of frame rates or resolution will account for the fact that the plane doesn't react at all to the supposed impact.

But hey, we're getting off topic. You said Shanksville was inconclusive. So er, how empty does a field have to be before you can accept that there was no plane there...?

[helloperator]

So...if we can find a non tampered with video then we should only have video interlacing issues to deal with?

Do you think we should have been able to see some part of the wing break away and fall down crash side of the wtc? To what extent can video interlacing make sections of the wing disappear and not fall down toward the ground on the side of the impact?

My laymen eyes tell me that the wings would not have had the muscle to disappear into the building like knives through butter....but that some of them would have at least snagged somewhere in the facade...or even broken off to then fall to the ground.

So...does video interlacing mask all of those things?

Do you have any 'vanilla' footage? If there is such a thing.

[john white]

What about the fact that the tail doesn't snap forward as the front of plane slows due to resistance...? No amount of frame rates or resolution will account for the fact that the plane doesn't react at all to the supposed impact.



Really? And how do you know the effect you are looking to see isn't amongst the 75% of total frames left out of the "melting" footage?

I think the answer there is you can't

But hey, we're getting off topic. You said Shanksville was inconclusive. So er, how empty does a field have to be before you can accept that there was no plane there...?

inconclusive, definition of:

in·con·clu·sive (nkn-klsv)
adj.
Not conclusive: inconclusive evidence.

incon·clusive·ly adv.
incon·clusive·ness n.


Adjective
not giving a final decision or result

All that is required is to state that the evidence supporting the claims of the 9/11 Commission regarding Shanskville and the Pentagon is weak and unsubstantiated, and therefore demands thorough and transparent investigation to establish the full facts, as part of a full and vigorous investigation of the treason behind 9/11, with the prosecution of the traitors, and all who have aided and abetted them

Would you like to explain why you cannot accept the above as a definitive and progressive response based on inconclusive evidence of what happened at Shanksville?

Could you also explain why what happened at Shanksville should be the same as what happened at the WTC when they were separate incidents and the evidence at the WTC is definitively conclusive as to the existence of Planes at that incident?

[helloperator]

So...if we can find a non tampered with video then we should only have video interlacing issues to deal with?

Do you think we should have been able to see some part of the wing break away and fall down crash side of the wtc? To what extent can video interlacing make sections of the wing disappear and not fall down toward the ground on the side of the impact?

My laymen eyes tell me that the wings would not have had the muscle to disappear into the building like knives through butter....but that some of them would have at least snagged somewhere in the facade...or even broken off to then fall to the ground.

So...does video interlacing mask all of those things?

Do you have any 'vanilla' footage? If there is such a thing.

Any comments on my noob questions?

[bryan]

Do you think we should have been able to see some part of the wing break away and fall down crash side of the wtc? To what extent can video interlacing make sections of the wing disappear and not fall down toward the ground on the side of the impact?

My laymen eyes tell me that the wings would not have had the muscle to disappear into the building like knives through butter....but that some of them would have at least snagged somewhere in the facade...or even broken off to then fall to the ground.

Any comments on my noob questions?

Careful. You can be branded a traitor for asking questions like these.

[killtown]

Has any skeptic won the challenge yet?

[john white]

Has any skeptic won the challenge yet?

What's a sceptic? someone declaring 9/11 an inside job based on facts not fraud?

And your "challenge" is already won

Your denial doesn't change that

All that is required is to state that the evidence supporting the claims of the 9/11 Commission regarding Shanskville and the Pentagon is weak and unsubstantiated, and therefore demands thorough and transparent investigation to establish the full facts, as part of a full and vigorous investigation of the treason behind 9/11, with the prosecution of the traitors, and all who have aided and abetted them

But your inability to challenge this says volumes about the falseness of your motivation

Your not scared to see traitors prosecuted are you "killtown"?

[helloperator]

Note: I am on the fence.

Someone direct me to a study of why no plane wings fell or broke off on impact and fell to the ground please.

Why did they slide right in?

[secondsun]

Someone direct me to a study of why no plane wings fell or broke off on impact and fell to the ground please.


...can you or any other no planer prove irrefutably that the two photos below show no shattered fragments of the plane that hit the south tower???

http://i41.tinypic.com/23qt92.jpg

http://i41.tinypic.com/xcu1lg.jpg

...i doubt it!

[killtown]

Obviously people can't read:

"Take the Boeing 757 Challenge! (non-troll thread) "

[mr_pixie]

...can you or any other no planer prove irrefutably that the two photos below show no shattered fragments of the plane that hit the south tower???

http://i41.tinypic.com/23qt92.jpg

http://i41.tinypic.com/xcu1lg.jpg

...i doubt it!

Not with these tampered with photos. But that would be impossable to prove anyway but just looking at the pictures you have selected no it looks consistant with a missle attack not jet fuel/Plane impact.

[stannrodd]

MR PIXIE !!

One has to assume that you can convincingly identify objects ...in that cloud of debris with some conviction .. ? You say ..

... but just looking at the pictures you have selected no it looks consistant with a missle attack not jet fuel/Plane impact.

How are they tampered .. ?

You are an expert ..?

Would you care to demonstrate how you can determine that there are no aircraft parts in that debris field .. but first .. why don't you demonstrate how you know there is missile debris there .. from looking at that picture.. ??

Remember the photo is tampered with .. as you allege .. your argument has basic logical faults .. see your leader .. !!

Stann

[mr_pixie]

Still think the picture is tampered with you can see it.

[mr_pixie]

You are an expert ..?

No, are you. But my eyes have got used to spotting fake video and stills.

whats an expert anyway? isnt it experence?

[helloperator]

...can you or any other no planer prove irrefutably that the two photos below show no shattered fragments of the plane that hit the south tower???

http://i41.tinypic.com/23qt92.jpg

http://i41.tinypic.com/xcu1lg.jpg

...i doubt it!

Be careful that you read people's posts before you comment.

I specifically stated that I am 'on the fence' with regard to planes/ no planes.

Don't call me a 'no planer' thanks.
Are those 'exit' sides....or impact side or what? I wanna watch to see if the wings detatch in anyway, like you would expect them to or if they just slice through. I want to watch a shot that holds on the impact side to see if I can see any plane material/ wings etc falling...or to see if the smoke masks whatever view could show that.

I wanna see if the wings start to slice off or fold or whether they stay the course and slice in with the same force as the bulk of the plane did.









Anyway...this thread is about Skanksville.....sure seems like there was no big jet at that site....

So no....I fail the challenge....

[killtown]

skeptics, I thought you like to take on truther's challenges?

Maybe Mackey and Wieck can debunk this challenge. lol

[stannrodd]

You are an expert ..?

No, are you.

Never said I was ..?!

But my eyes have got used to spotting fake video and stills.

So YOU say .. !

Why would anyone believe you ! ??

Can you provide some evidence to support this claim of your skills ??

I seriously doubt it.

Stann