• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is there any way to cure a truther?[W:2707]

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

With no obstructions in it's path, a computer would only need one perfect course correction, not two.

Not necessarily. Even a computer would have to deal with the physical limitations of the aircraft at 500 mph. And I do not think aircraft that big are designed to do aerobatics at 500 mph at nearly sea level.

Wouldn't a longer more gradual curve involve more calculation and compensation for wind? Would the software be easier to design to maintain straight lines between the points where the necessary safe but sharp turns would be made? There would be a subroutine that did nothing but maintain a straight path while compensating for wind with a supervisory program that determined when and where turns had to be made and shift control to the turning program while passing it the necessary parameters when needed.

That is the interesting thing about computers. They do not really think. But human beings design the procedures of expert systems so they get the jobs done more reliably than humans.

psik
 
Last edited:
Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

Typical CT non answer.

its very simple question. Why trust this site you provided the link to?
What about the content of the info? Are there not web sites that refute the CGI? Let me help you, yes there are. It it your contention that those sites are wrong? If so, why is that?

MK, you post but you do little to back up what you are posting.


>The emperor is NAKED,

>> are you calling all of these people who are praising the tailor .. LIARS?

> OK, here it is, ALL of the people who are presently singing praises to a non-existent tailor, are WRONG!

In fact I'll go so far as to say that Dr. Sunder has willfully committed FRAUD.
 
Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

Yet, I do not need you to state how I should or should not think. You would not like if I stated the probability of some of your answers being correct.

Please be so kind as to do so.

But when do I ever talk about conspiracies and demolition?

psik
 
Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

I think it was only one actual course correction at about five seconds before impact.

The second movement, within a few hundred yards of the building, did not correct the course and was just to raise the wings to hit more of the building vertically.

This video shows two turns in the last 12 seconds. Start watching at 5 minutes.

UA175 - the last 12 seconds - YouTube

First is the yellow path which would miss but takes the plane to a low altitude. It then turns onto the blue path which would still miss but positions the plane in front of the building. Then it turns onto the red path that takes it straight in.

Now I did not collect this data or check it so it it not like I TRUST it. But it is well presented and I have not seen any refutations yet. But those lines before and between the turns are very straight. That long first line which would obviously miss the target seems like an odd thing for a human pilot to do. But a cold calculating machine which cannot even doubt its reliability since it cannot doubt would do it that way. Just following the program.

psik
 
Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

Menard_K;1061933776In fact I'll go so far as to say that Dr. Sunder has willfully committed FRAUD.[/QUOTE said:
You can say that.
Now, will you or a group you belong to take Dr. Sunder to court and sue for fraud?
 
Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

A strong gust might push the aircraft to the side but it would not change the bearing and blow the aircraft degrees off target, especially with the aircraft at high speed, which tends to resist wind movement.

UA175 made very definitive precise turns at the last minute which it was not making beforehand as an autopilot would do incrementally. This becomes clear once it is looked at analytically.

Something smells very bad in the approach of UA175 to the South Tower. The same is true of UA11 and the North Tower according to Aidan Monaghan.

My guess is that '175' was navigating a series of waypoints, as is the military way to attack a target. Close in the aircraft acquires a homing signal or laser target designator for precise strike.

I agree, it appears the aircraft banked hard to hit the building. Was it a weak signal? Fault targeting? I certainly don't know, but the airplane damn near missed the target.

If you can put your hands on anybody's pictures of the strikes by UA11, I would be most interested. It's almost like there are 2 versions of the Naudet video?
 
Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

This video shows two turns in the last 12 seconds. Start watching at 5 minutes.

UA175 - the last 12 seconds - YouTube

First is the yellow path which would miss but takes the plane to a low altitude. It then turns onto the blue path which would still miss but positions the plane in front of the building. Then it turns onto the red path that takes it straight in.

Now I did not collect this data or check it so it it not like I TRUST it. But it is well presented and I have not seen any refutations yet. But those lines before and between the turns are very straight. That long first line which would obviously miss the target seems like an odd thing for a human pilot to do. But a cold calculating machine which cannot even doubt its reliability since it cannot doubt would do it that way. Just following the program.

psik

Yes, it seems like there were two corrections necessary, which were both made within the last five seconds.

That is the video by Achimspok that convinced me there was a problem with the South Tower aircraft.
 
Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

Over the decade I listened, evaluated, and have come to believe the truthers are wrong. Far too much evidence they want to or blatantly do ignore proves them wrong. Sadly I have a close family member that is a truther extremist. Is there any way to bring him back to reality. Existing truthers need not apply.

This of course makes the assumption that "reality" is indeed the story about 19 suicidal Arab fanatics, who hijack airliners & crash them into buildings.... HOWEVER, what if this "reality" really isn't?

I ask you as a taxpayer, are you OK with the fact that the worlds greatest military power FAILED to defend even its own HQ, and on 9/12 Donald Rumsfeld still had a JOB?
 
Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

This of course makes the assumption that "reality" is indeed the story about 19 suicidal Arab fanatics, who hijack airliners & crash them into buildings.... HOWEVER, what if this "reality" really isn't?

I ask you as a taxpayer, are you OK with the fact that the worlds greatest military power FAILED to defend even its own HQ, and on 9/12 Donald Rumsfeld still had a JOB?

Please answer your own questions, I really want to know what you are thinking.


To answer yours.
"HOWEVER, what if this "reality" really isn't? But it seem it is.

"I ask you as a taxpayer, are you OK with the fact that the worlds greatest military power FAILED to defend even its own HQ, and on 9/12 Donald Rumsfeld still had a JOB? "

To answer this I need to know what presumed "reality" you want the response tied to.:mrgreen:
 
Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

Please answer your own questions, I really want to know what you are thinking.


To answer yours.
"HOWEVER, what if this "reality" really isn't? But it seem it is.

"I ask you as a taxpayer, are you OK with the fact that the worlds greatest military power FAILED to defend even its own HQ, and on 9/12 Donald Rumsfeld still had a JOB? "

To answer this I need to know what presumed "reality" you want the response tied to.:mrgreen:

First of all, you don't need to have anything from me in order to express what YOU believe about the events of 9/11/2001
... was the attack the product of angry Arabs? or was it maybe something else?

What do YOU believe?

as for me, the reality is that I see it as a FALSE FLAG ATTACK
& there were NO airliners hijacked & the MSM has been spewing lies & fraud about it for over a decade.
 
Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

First of all, you don't need to have anything from me in order to express what YOU believe about the events of 9/11/2001
... was the attack the product of angry Arabs? or was it maybe something else?

What do YOU believe?

as for me, the reality is that I see it as a FALSE FLAG ATTACK
& there were NO airliners hijacked & the MSM has been spewing lies & fraud about it for over a decade.

If you have reviewed posts and threads you would know what I have said I accept as to what happened on 9/11.
hijacked jets/crash/damage/fire/damage/collapse. hijacked jet into Pentagon, hijacked jet crashed in PA.
There were lapses within the intelligence community to share information and provide adequate prewarning.

With what you believe, I don't. I know you won't convice me, and I won't convince you. If you want to try and convince me, fire away. (here is a hint. Support your claim without refering to the govt reports regarding 9/11. You believe them to be lies.. Therefore, present your explanation and supporting documents that proves the false flag, no jets, etc).
 
Last edited:
Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

If you have reviewed posts and threads you would know what I have said I accept as to what happened on 9/11.
hijacked jets/crash/damage/fire/damage/collapse. hijacked jet into Pentagon, hijacked jet crashed in PA.
There were lapses within the intelligence community to share information and provide adequate prewarning.

With what you believe, I don't. I know you won't convice me, and I won't convince you. If you want to try and convince me, fire away. (here is a hint. Support your claim without refering to the govt reports regarding 9/11. You believe them to be lies.. Therefore, present your explanation and supporting documents that proves the false flag, no jets, etc).

This can be simply based on common sense, and logic
or we can get into a "my experts are better than your experts" sort of argument.
oops!

On the common sense bit, Please not that in the case of the "aircraft" smashing into the WTC
the event makes a neat airplane shaped cutout wings & all, and in he case of the Pentagon hit
there is this one little hole. also for the Pentagon event, the wings of the aircraft were said to
have neatly folded back in order to enter the hole with the fuselage. There are all sorts of physical
inconsistencies between the twin tower crashes & the Pentagon....

To be continued.........
 
Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

This can be simply based on common sense, and logic
or we can get into a "my experts are better than your experts" sort of argument.
oops!

On the common sense bit, Please not that in the case of the "aircraft" smashing into the WTC
the event makes a neat airplane shaped cutout wings & all, and in he case of the Pentagon hit
there is this one little hole. also for the Pentagon event, the wings of the aircraft were said to
have neatly folded back in order to enter the hole with the fuselage. There are all sorts of physical
inconsistencies between the twin tower crashes & the Pentagon....

To be continued.........

The twin tower aircraft impacts make sense and were not all that neat and complete. While the outline of an aircraft is there, close inspection shows the top of the tail and tips of the wings were sheared off prior to entering completely.
 
Last edited:
Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

The aircraft cannot possibly be easier to control in a higher pressure situation than what is optimal. Optimal would surely be for landing and takeoff speeds due to the low tolerance for error. The place one can give something up to use high speed is at high altitude. You can't have it both ways, and that is what your claim is attempting to do.

The factor of safety here is relative to the risk or tolerance for error. I can guarantee that the control surface size and location is optimal for landing and takeoff speeds with something given up for high speed that is partially mitigated at altitude, but wouldn't be at sea level. The level of control at high speed is not even close to what it is at landing and takeoff speeds, even at high altitude, let alone at sea level.

I was an aircraft mechanic and for the last 27 years a mechanical engineer, so I am not without real world experience here.

You are taking into consideration only 1 factor which as an engineer you should know is a mistake. You have to factor in the extra strength you need to make all the parts which adds weight etc.
Simple fact is you move the controls less at higher speeds this is natural as there is more resistance, the reaction is quicker and everything becomes easier any pilot can tell you this.
 
Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

If you have reviewed posts and threads you would know what I have said I accept as to what happened on 9/11.
hijacked jets/crash/damage/fire/damage/collapse. hijacked jet into Pentagon, hijacked jet crashed in PA.
There were lapses within the intelligence community to share information and provide adequate prewarning.

With what you believe, I don't. I know you won't convice me, and I won't convince you. If you want to try and convince me, fire away. (here is a hint. Support your claim without refering to the govt reports regarding 9/11. You believe them to be lies.. Therefore, present your explanation and supporting documents that proves the false flag, no jets, etc).

Why are you interested in being convinced of something that your mind is already made up over?

You cannot prove any element of the story you defend or the claims you make in that post, yet you place absolute confidence in your view. If that ain't "faith", I don't know what is.

Believing the statements of known liars like Dick, Dubya and Donald is "faith", pure and simple.
 
Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

Why are you interested in being convinced of something that your mind is already made up over?

You cannot prove any element of the story you defend or the claims you make in that post, yet you place absolute confidence in your view. If that ain't "faith", I don't know what is.

Believing the statements of known liars like Dick, Dubya and Donald is "faith", pure and simple.

again what you say applies perfectly to your position. And again you say Mike believes Dick, Dubya and Donald when he has said he doesn't
 
Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

Why are you interested in being convinced of something that your mind is already made up over?

You cannot prove any element of the story you defend or the claims you make in that post, yet you place absolute confidence in your view. If that ain't "faith", I don't know what is.

Believing the statements of known liars like Dick, Dubya and Donald is "faith", pure and simple.

why do you respond to post in which you have no reason to?

Unlike you, I have stated that yes I believe in jet/fire/collapse. I have said that if CD is ever proven, then I will accept another explanation.

Unlike you, I am willing to debate. However, I am not going to debate the govt. report. I have stated each explantion is a stand alone. It was brought out as an explantiion the jets were CGI. That is what I am interested in seeing why someone believes so.

and your source authors have said nothing but 100% truth, right?
 
Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

why do you respond to post in which you have no reason to?

Unlike you, I have stated that yes I believe in jet/fire/collapse. I have said that if CD is ever proven, then I will accept another explanation.

Unlike you, I am willing to debate. However, I am not going to debate the govt. report. I have stated each explantion is a stand alone. It was brought out as an explantiion the jets were CGI. That is what I am interested in seeing why someone believes so.

and your source authors have said nothing but 100% truth, right?

Apologies Mike. I did not realize you were limiting your analysis to just CGI. Should have known, but didn't realize.

There is so much more.....
 
Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

Apologies Mike. I did not realize you were limiting your analysis to just CGI. Should have known, but didn't realize.

There is so much more.....

we are good.
Just asking, I know your stance and respect that you have the views you do. Do you think the jets were computer graphic images for the two towers? Seems CGI does not draw a big support on the CT side.

FYI, I am still open to controlled demolition. For me personally, not enough evidence yet.
 
Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

You are taking into consideration only 1 factor which as an engineer you should know is a mistake. You have to factor in the extra strength you need to make all the parts which adds weight etc.
Simple fact is you move the controls less at higher speeds this is natural as there is more resistance, the reaction is quicker and everything becomes easier any pilot can tell you this.

Your 1 factor point isn't an argument. The reality is that landing and takeoff are the most perilous points in a flight and control needs to be maximized there. High altitude flight is much more forgiving and that is where the trade-offs would be made. Your point about moving the controls less at high speed is true and that is precisely why there is less control. Less movement means less resolution and thus less control.

The reality is that an aircraft is designed for maximum control at low speed. High speed is usually only used at high altitude where low air density reduces pressure and mitigates some of the differences between low and high speed control. At high speed at sea level it would be extraordinarily hard, if not impossible, for a human pilot to control the aircraft with any precision.

It is clear that the South Tower aircraft was computer controlled above and beyond autopilot. The level of precision involved was beyond a human pilot and an autopilot set for the tower would have been nosing towards the building from way out like a human pilot. The aircraft was not nosing toward the building and didn't turn towards it until two miles away. So the only option is some form of computer and homing control beyond autopilot.
 
Last edited:
Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

again what you say applies perfectly to your position. And again you say Mike believes Dick, Dubya and Donald when he has said he doesn't

Not saying anyone does or doesn't here, but I would be amazed that anyone could believe the Bush administration lied about some major things (like Iraq) but didn't or wouldn't have about 911.
 
Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

First, I am not a scholar by any means and clearly not respected... just opinionated and someone who has tried to avail himself of alternate sources of news. I don't gather news I consume it and so I need to evaluate the quality of the new presenters.

Assange is probably not what he appears to be. However I don't think he is a CIA asset /agent or dupe. I haven't read the cables but only heard their contents referred to and the thing which seems to piss of the state is the fact that the security has been breached and good band and indifferent are or can see some light. MSM reporters are incapable of doing anything but stenography. Manning, Hammond and Assange are violating the absurd secrecy which cloaks the state. Much of it covering criminal activity. CIA is at its core a criminal agency engaged in mostly illegal activities which managed to be sanctioned by congress because their mission must be secret to protect the state (secrets and more). CIA ops are the stuff of foreign policy, with the state department being just the fig leaf of respectability over the hegemonic agenda. State is probably a conduit for communications ... of illegal activities and Wkileaks appears to expose the sham.

Trials today are with packed juries and bought judges when needed. They are nothing more than show trials. I think Hammond and Manning are being made examples to scare anyone who might leak this info. Clearly the nasty stuff does get to pass before innocent eyes who SHOULD expose the criminality but are so intimidated by the State they don't... and these trials and Aaron Swartz are meant to send this message. There are other hackers that at paying dearly for doing the right thing.

I lived through the Nixon Era and thought that Ellsberg was his own man. No one was releasing all the BS about Nam and he did it and it was one of the things which led to the end of the war. Nixon believed whatever he did as president was legal. He was wrong but future presidents thought the same.

Woodward is not a good fellow. He got rid of Nixon but not the corruption of the CIA, intel, FBI and the Pentagon. Nixon was not one of them and so they could care less about him. CIA seems to be running things since JFK was taken out. He wanted to give a mighty haircut to the national security state. NSS is not going to let democracy get in the way.



The more you look, the more spooks were around Watergate than you can imagine.

Skolnick on Woodwards father …

“Chief Judge Woodward had a strange background. Previously he had been with both the army AND the navy intelligence agencies. HOW was that possible? ”

The Overthrow Of The American Republic – Part 75 Bob Woodward Coverup

Overthrow Of American Republic - Bob Woodward Coverup

With regards to Bob Woodward, I have read some of his books and its obvious he is commissioned to write stenography, and its not just a payback in return for access to sources.Some writers are embedded and have always been. Ronald Kesslers astounding book, “Inside the CIA” was followed by a similar “Inside the FBI” which was OK but limp, calculated and servile in its critiques, although imformative. Since his CIA book shook the world, Kessler became just another Howard Kurtz, in other words, useless.

_______________________________________________
More below from Russ Baker, a supposed journo veteran of many publications, writing at Hustler, havent heard of him until the last year:

LarryFlynt.com » Blog Archive » BOB WOODWARD THE STORY HE WON’T TELL

Note: Both Baker and Skolnick use as a source “Silent Coup: The Removal of A President” by Len Colodny and Robert Gettlin, a book with sources, stories supplied by villian G.Gordon Liddy. Both John Dean and History Commons website call the book “fairytales” or a book to revive the Nixon legacy, (all debates aside) there seems to be a mountain of evidence Woodward was an intel agent. Russ Bakers work appears flawless, confirming many facts about Cointelpro we learned from the film JFK II, see my JFK thread.



Rewriting History:

“Family of Secrets” by Russ Baker,

REVIEWED BY DIANA LEE

Rewriting History: Family of Secrets by Russ Baker

_______________________________________________

Anyway more about Woodward

“Ben Bradlee was the Post’s managing editor during most of the Cold War. He worked in the U.S. Paris embassy from 1951 to 1953, where he followed orders by the CIA station chief to place propaganda in the European press.”

“Furthermore, Watergate was exposed by the CIA’s main newspaper in America, The Washington Post. One of the two journalists who investigated the scandal, Robert Woodward, had only recently become a journalist. Previously Woodward had worked as a Naval intelligence liaison to the White House, privy to some of the nation’s highest secrets. He would later write a sympathetic portrait of CIA Director Bill Casey in a book entitled Veil: The Secret Wars of the CIA.”

The Origins of the Overclass

Daily Kos: Bob Woodward...ALL smoke and mirrors?

THE TRUTH about CIA Director Casey? read “the Last Days of the CIA” by Mark Perry

Sympathetic? Sheesh, CIA director Casey only was responsible for creating Al Queda, (not Brezinski), arming Saddam with chemical weapons that killed hundreds of thousands in Iran/Iraq war, and making it so Saddam won that war thru direct aid and satellite imagery your taxes bought, other wise he would have lost that war.





Some say Colby who is seen testifying, paid for this by being mysteriously killed in retirement. An interesting investigation on the mysterious death of Colby who defied the CIA and testified at the Church committee about Mockingbird/Cointelpro, when ordered not to. I dont know if you read the William Colby killing story I posted in this thread, but after heading up the horrific Pheonix Program in Vietnam and those war crimes/ atrocities,he too may have had his conscience nagging him, so against the direct orders of the CIA prohibiting him from doing so, he testified before the Church Committee. Certainly no hero, I believe he paid for this with his life. And if Snowden is genuine, the auhtorities will make another Bradley Manning of him dont you think?

WHO MURDERED THE CIA CHIEF?
 
Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

Your 1 factor point isn't an argument. The reality is that landing and takeoff are the most perilous points in a flight and control needs to be maximized there. High altitude flight is much more forgiving and that is where the trade-offs would be made. Your point about moving the controls less at high speed is true and that is precisely why there is less control. Less movement means less resolution and thus less control.

The reality is that an aircraft is designed for maximum control at low speed. High speed is usually only used at high altitude where low air density reduces pressure and mitigates some of the differences between low and high speed control. At high speed at sea level it would be extraordinarily hard, if not impossible, for a human pilot to control the aircraft with any precision.

It is clear that the South Tower aircraft was computer controlled above and beyond autopilot. The level of precision involved was beyond a human pilot and an autopilot set for the tower would have been nosing towards the building from way out like a human pilot. The aircraft was not nosing toward the building and didn't turn towards it until two miles away. So the only option is some form of computer and homing control beyond autopilot.

No my point is valid you refuse to accept it and now you've gone into tin foil hat land claiming computer controlled planes. Seriously on what incredibly weak grounds do you base this? why would it have tyo be computer controlled? fact planes are controllable oat high speeds this is not an opinion this is a fact.
 
Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

Not saying anyone does or doesn't here, but I would be amazed that anyone could believe the Bush administration lied about some major things (like Iraq) but didn't or wouldn't have about 911.

Not arguing that
 
Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

No my point is valid you refuse to accept it and now you've gone into tin foil hat land claiming computer controlled planes. Seriously on what incredibly weak grounds do you base this? why would it have tyo be computer controlled? fact planes are controllable oat high speeds this is not an opinion this is a fact.

I don't see how a human pilot, or an autopilot set by a human pilot, would not have been nosing toward the building.

Do you have any thoughts on why a human pilot, or even an autopilot, would not have been nosing toward the building?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom