Flight 93 crash fantasy

[Fizz]

i guess when all the witnesses to the fake moon landing come out... We will see the conspirators in this idiocy come forward too.

Wow.... I want the time i wasted here back.... Who do i talk to? (mods?)

the idiocy would be if several astronauts came forward to say the moon landing was fake and I simply ridiculed and dismissed them...

so how many people have come out and said they were in on the plot but were dismissed, idiot?

 

[MandyInTN]

Explain how the DNA from the passengers got there.

How do you know the DNA was found where the govt said? Please provide full chain of custody and name. The govt refuses to provide such information.

Also, these articles may be of some interest.

Google - DNA Can Be Fabricated

(sorry, can't post url's yet)

Explain why Flight 77 was hijacked and then not used like planes in NYC were.

9/11: PENTAGON AIRCRAFT HIJACK IMPOSSIBLE
FLIGHT DECK DOOR CLOSED FOR ENTIRE FLIGHT

(PilotsFor911Truth.org) - Newly decoded data provided by an independent researcher and computer programmer from Australia exposes alarming evidence that the reported hijacking aboard American Airlines Flight 77 was impossible to have existed. A data parameter labeled "FLT DECK DOOR", cross checks with previously decoded data obtained by Pilots For 9/11 Truth from the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) through the Freedom Of Information Act.

On the morning of September 11, 2001, American Airlines Flight 77 departed Dulles International Airport bound for Los Angeles at 8:20 am Eastern Time. According to reports and data, a hijacking took place between 08 :50 :54 and 08:54:11[1] in which the hijackers allegedly crashed the aircraft into the Pentagon at 09:37:45. Reported by CNN, according to Ted Olson, wife Barbara Olson had called him from the reported flight stating, "...all passengers and flight personnel, including the pilots, were herded to the back of the plane by armed hijackers..."[2]. However, according to Flight Data provided by the NTSB, the Flight Deck Door was never opened in flight. How were the hijackers able to gain access to the cockpit, remove the pilots, and navigate the aircraft to the Pentagon if the Flight Deck Door remained closed?[3]

Founded in August 2006, Pilots For 9/11 Truth is a growing organization of aviation professionals from around the globe. The organization has analyzed Data provided by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) for the Pentagon Attack, the events in Shanksville, PA and the World Trade Center attack. The data does not support the government story. The NTSB/FBI refuse to comment. Pilots For 9/11 Truth do not offer theory or point blame at this point in time. However, there is a growing mountain of conflicting information and data in which government agencies and officials along with Mainstream Media refuse to acknowledge. Pilots For 9/11 Truth Core member list continues to grow.
​

Go to Pilotsfor911truth.org for sources and to download the data provided by the National Transportation Safety Board, or goto ntsb.gov to request your own directly.

 

[Fizz]

Explain how the DNA from the passengers got there.

How do you know the DNA was found where the govt said? Please provide full chain of custody and name. The govt refuses to provide such information.

Also, these articles may be of some interest.

Google - DNA Can Be Fabricated

(sorry, can't post url's yet)

Explain why Flight 77 was hijacked and then not used like planes in NYC were.

9/11: PENTAGON AIRCRAFT HIJACK IMPOSSIBLE
FLIGHT DECK DOOR CLOSED FOR ENTIRE FLIGHT

(PilotsFor911Truth.org) - Newly decoded data provided by an independent researcher and computer programmer from Australia exposes alarming evidence that the reported hijacking aboard American Airlines Flight 77 was impossible to have existed. A data parameter labeled "FLT DECK DOOR", cross checks with previously decoded data obtained by Pilots For 9/11 Truth from the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) through the Freedom Of Information Act.

On the morning of September 11, 2001, American Airlines Flight 77 departed Dulles International Airport bound for Los Angeles at 8:20 am Eastern Time. According to reports and data, a hijacking took place between 08 :50 :54 and 08:54:11[1] in which the hijackers allegedly crashed the aircraft into the Pentagon at 09:37:45. Reported by CNN, according to Ted Olson, wife Barbara Olson had called him from the reported flight stating, "...all passengers and flight personnel, including the pilots, were herded to the back of the plane by armed hijackers..."[2]. However, according to Flight Data provided by the NTSB, the Flight Deck Door was never opened in flight. How were the hijackers able to gain access to the cockpit, remove the pilots, and navigate the aircraft to the Pentagon if the Flight Deck Door remained closed?[3]

Founded in August 2006, Pilots For 9/11 Truth is a growing organization of aviation professionals from around the globe. The organization has analyzed Data provided by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) for the Pentagon Attack, the events in Shanksville, PA and the World Trade Center attack. The data does not support the government story. The NTSB/FBI refuse to comment. Pilots For 9/11 Truth do not offer theory or point blame at this point in time. However, there is a growing mountain of conflicting information and data in which government agencies and officials along with Mainstream Media refuse to acknowledge. Pilots For 9/11 Truth Core member list continues to grow.
​

Go to Pilotsfor911truth.org for sources and to download the data provided by the National Transportation Safety Board, or goto ntsb.gov to request your own directly.

another fucking idiot already posting shit thats already been debunked a million times.....

here's a clue for you. flight 77 was a 757-2 airframe manufactured in 1991. why dont you find out when the flight deck doors started being monitored in 757-2s before you start repeating the same old stupid bullshit you found on some conspiracy site.

 

[eots]

i guess when all the witnesses to the fake moon landing come out... We will see the conspirators in this idiocy come forward too.

Wow.... I want the time i wasted here back.... Who do i talk to? (mods?)

the idiocy would be if several astronauts came forward to say the moon landing was fake and i simply ridiculed and dismissed them...

so how many people have come out and said they were in on the plot but were dismissed, idiot?

multiple seasoned air crash investigators call the investigation a cover up

 

[Fizz]

the idiocy would be if several astronauts came forward to say the moon landing was fake and i simply ridiculed and dismissed them...

so how many people have come out and said they were in on the plot but were dismissed, idiot?

multiple seasoned air crash investigators call the investigation a cover up

so your answer is NONE.

you really are a fucking idiot....

 

[eots]

multiple seasoned air crash investigators call the investigation a cover up

the idiot is the one that dismisses this without explanation

 

[MandyInTN]

here's a clue for you. flight 77 was a 757-2 airframe manufactured in 1991. why dont you find out when the flight deck doors started being monitored in 757-2s before you start repeating the same old stupid bullshit you found on some conspiracy site.

Now learn about Data Frame Layouts -

Claim - P4T... are not using the proper Data Frame Layout when showing the port location in his diagram. They are using 757-3, they should be using 757-2 which doesn't show a FLT DECK DOOR parameter. AA77 was a 757-2 airplane.

A- Those who make this claim are confusing the Data Frame Layout (DFL) number with Aircraft Type. 757-3b is the proper Data Frame Layout required for N644AA as listed here in the NTSB pdf for N644AA.

ntsb.gov/info/AAL77_fdr.pdf
(bottom of page 2)

United 93 was also a 757-200 aircraft, but used 757-4 Data Frame Layout.

ntsb.gov/info/UAL93FDR.pdf
(also bottom of page 2)

DFL 757-3b (AA77) has the FLT DECK DOOR parameter which is why you see it listed under the parameters in the NTSB pdf and recorded in the data.

DFL 757-4 (UA93) does not list a FLT DECK DOOR parameter, which is why it is not listed in the NTSB pdf nor recorded.
​

 

[saiweril]

You skeptics still believe a 757 crashed in Shanksville even after I showed you how absurd the official story is of what happened to the plane after it supposedly crashed?

Really?!?

 

[DiveCon]

You skeptics still believe a 757 crashed in Shanksville even after I showed you how absurd the official story is of what happened to the plane after it supposedly crashed?

Really?!?

are you actually that fucking stupid that you think your little gif actually has credibility?

 

[Godboy]

You skeptics still believe a 757 crashed in Shanksville even after I showed you how absurd the official story is of what happened to the plane after it supposedly crashed?

Really?!?

are you actually that fucking stupid that you think your little gif actually has credibility?

Do you remember what forum section we're in? Of course he believes it. Anythings possible here in fantasy land, where facts no longer count.

 

[DiveCon]

You skeptics still believe a 757 crashed in Shanksville even after I showed you how absurd the official story is of what happened to the plane after it supposedly crashed?

Really?!?

are you actually that fucking stupid that you think your little gif actually has credibility?

Do you remember what forum section we're in? Of course he believes it. Anythings possible here in fantasy land, where facts no longer count.

true, the Id-Eots zone is FULL of em

 

[Fizz]

here's a clue for you. flight 77 was a 757-2 airframe manufactured in 1991. why dont you find out when the flight deck doors started being monitored in 757-2s before you start repeating the same old stupid bullshit you found on some conspiracy site.

Now learn about Data Frame Layouts -

Claim - P4T... are not using the proper Data Frame Layout when showing the port location in his diagram. They are using 757-3, they should be using 757-2 which doesn't show a FLT DECK DOOR parameter. AA77 was a 757-2 airplane.

A- Those who make this claim are confusing the Data Frame Layout (DFL) number with Aircraft Type. 757-3b is the proper Data Frame Layout required for N644AA as listed here in the NTSB pdf for N644AA.

ntsb.gov/info/AAL77_fdr.pdf
(bottom of page 2)

United 93 was also a 757-200 aircraft, but used 757-4 Data Frame Layout.

ntsb.gov/info/UAL93FDR.pdf
(also bottom of page 2)

DFL 757-3b (AA77) has the FLT DECK DOOR parameter which is why you see it listed under the parameters in the NTSB pdf and recorded in the data.

DFL 757-4 (UA93) does not list a FLT DECK DOOR parameter, which is why it is not listed in the NTSB pdf nor recorded.
​

i've already read that. thanks for posting it and proving your flight deck door was not monitored. (let me guess. you have no idea what you just posted).

 

[saiweril]

You skeptics still believe a 757 crashed in Shanksville even after I showed you how absurd the official story is of what happened to the plane after it supposedly crashed?

Really?!?

are you actually that fucking stupid that you think your little gif actually has credibility?

You're actually debating whether posting gifs adds credibility or not?

I actually thought you were asking if I was that fucking stupid for still thinking you skeptics still believe the Flight 93 official fantasy story. I would have apologized for still thinking you guys still believed on that fantasy story.

 

[DiveCon]

You skeptics still believe a 757 crashed in Shanksville even after I showed you how absurd the official story is of what happened to the plane after it supposedly crashed?

Really?!?

are you actually that fucking stupid that you think your little gif actually has credibility?

You're actually debating whether posting gifs adds credibility or not?

I actually thought you were asking if I was that fucking stupid for still thinking you skeptics still believe the Flight 93 official fantasy story. I would have apologized for still thinking you guys still believed on that fantasy story.

both
you are that fucking stupid to actually believe your complete fucking nonsense

 

[saiweril]

are you actually that fucking stupid that you think your little gif actually has credibility?

You're actually debating whether posting gifs adds credibility or not?

I actually thought you were asking if I was that fucking stupid for still thinking you skeptics still believe the Flight 93 official fantasy story. I would have apologized for still thinking you guys still believed on that fantasy story.

both

You guys post that same gif. Are you guys fucking stupid when you do that?

you are that fucking stupid to actually believe your complete fucking nonsense

You got me confused, I don't believe the official Flight 93 fantasy story.

 

[DiveCon]

You're actually debating whether posting gifs adds credibility or not?

I actually thought you were asking if I was that fucking stupid for still thinking you skeptics still believe the Flight 93 official fantasy story. I would have apologized for still thinking you guys still believed on that fantasy story.

both

You guys post that same gif. Are you guys fucking stupid when you do that?

you are that fucking stupid to actually believe your complete fucking nonsense

You got me confused, I don't believe the official Flight 93 fantasy story.

sorry, who are "you guys"?
i've never posted that stupid gif

 

[saiweril]

both

You guys post that same gif. Are you guys fucking stupid when you do that?

you are that fucking stupid to actually believe your complete fucking nonsense

You got me confused, I don't believe the official Flight 93 fantasy story.

sorry, who are "you guys"?
i've never posted that stupid gif

Have you chastised your fellow skeptic friends here for posting that gif, or are you a hypocrite?

Let me know when you want to get back to debating the topic of this thread since it seems like you still believe in the official Flight 93 fantasy story.

 

[DiveCon]

You guys post that same gif. Are you guys fucking stupid when you do that?


You got me confused, I don't believe the official Flight 93 fantasy story.

sorry, who are "you guys"?
i've never posted that stupid gif

Have you chastised your fellow skeptic friends here for posting that gif, or are you a hypocrite?

Let me know when you want to get back to debating the topic of this thread since it seems like you still believe in the official Flight 93 fantasy story.

YOU are the only one that has posted it, moron

and the only fantasy story about flight 93 is what you fucking troofer morons post

 

[MandyInTN]

here's a clue for you. flight 77 was a 757-2 airframe manufactured in 1991. why dont you find out when the flight deck doors started being monitored in 757-2s before you start repeating the same old stupid bullshit you found on some conspiracy site.

Now learn about Data Frame Layouts -

Claim - P4T... are not using the proper Data Frame Layout when showing the port location in his diagram. They are using 757-3, they should be using 757-2 which doesn't show a FLT DECK DOOR parameter. AA77 was a 757-2 airplane.

A- Those who make this claim are confusing the Data Frame Layout (DFL) number with Aircraft Type. 757-3b is the proper Data Frame Layout required for N644AA as listed here in the NTSB pdf for N644AA.

ntsb.gov/info/AAL77_fdr.pdf
(bottom of page 2)

United 93 was also a 757-200 aircraft, but used 757-4 Data Frame Layout.

ntsb.gov/info/UAL93FDR.pdf
(also bottom of page 2)

DFL 757-3b (AA77) has the FLT DECK DOOR parameter which is why you see it listed under the parameters in the NTSB pdf and recorded in the data.

DFL 757-4 (UA93) does not list a FLT DECK DOOR parameter, which is why it is not listed in the NTSB pdf nor recorded.
​

i've already read that. thanks for posting it and proving your flight deck door was not monitored. (let me guess. you have no idea what you just posted).

I do, do you?

I'll bold the parts you missed.

DFL 757-3b (AA77) has the FLT DECK DOOR parameter which is why you see it listed under the parameters in the NTSB pdf and recorded in the data.

DFL 757-4 (UA93) does not list a FLT DECK DOOR parameter, which is why it is not listed in the NTSB pdf nor recorded.

In other words Fizz,

The data provided by the NTSB for Flight 77 shows the cockpit door closed. It was listed and recorded. It is impossible for a hijack to take place.

Flight 93 did not list the Flight Deck Door, and is not recorded on United aircraft. It is impossible to determine if the aircraft was hijacked.

In further words Fizz -

DFL number has absolutely nothing to do with aircraft type. DFL 757-3b_1.txt is the custom data frame layout made by American Airlines for N644AA (AA77).

DFL 757-4 is the custom data frame layout made for N591UA (UA93) by United Airlines.

UA93 and AA77 are both 757-200's (not "757-2's"), they use different DFL's because they are not the same exact aircraft nor record the same exact parameters.

In case you're still confused -

AA77 records the Flight Deck Door.

UA93 does not.

Hope this clears it up for you.

 

[DiveCon]

Now learn about Data Frame Layouts -

Claim - P4T... are not using the proper Data Frame Layout when showing the port location in his diagram. They are using 757-3, they should be using 757-2 which doesn't show a FLT DECK DOOR parameter. AA77 was a 757-2 airplane.

A- Those who make this claim are confusing the Data Frame Layout (DFL) number with Aircraft Type. 757-3b is the proper Data Frame Layout required for N644AA as listed here in the NTSB pdf for N644AA.

ntsb.gov/info/AAL77_fdr.pdf
(bottom of page 2)

United 93 was also a 757-200 aircraft, but used 757-4 Data Frame Layout.

ntsb.gov/info/UAL93FDR.pdf
(also bottom of page 2)

DFL 757-3b (AA77) has the FLT DECK DOOR parameter which is why you see it listed under the parameters in the NTSB pdf and recorded in the data.

DFL 757-4 (UA93) does not list a FLT DECK DOOR parameter, which is why it is not listed in the NTSB pdf nor recorded.
​

i've already read that. thanks for posting it and proving your flight deck door was not monitored. (let me guess. you have no idea what you just posted).

I do, do you?

I'll bold the parts you missed.

DFL 757-3b (AA77) has the FLT DECK DOOR parameter which is why you see it listed under the parameters in the NTSB pdf and recorded in the data.

DFL 757-4 (UA93) does not list a FLT DECK DOOR parameter, which is why it is not listed in the NTSB pdf nor recorded.

In other words Fizz,

The data provided by the NTSB for Flight 77 shows the cockpit door closed. It was listed and recorded. It is impossible for a hijack to take place.

Flight 93 did not list the Flight Deck Door, and is not recorded on United aircraft. It is impossible to determine if the aircraft was hijacked.

In further words Fizz -

DFL number has absolutely nothing to do with aircraft type. DFL 757-3b_1.txt is the custom data frame layout made by American Airlines for N644AA (AA77).

DFL 757-4 is the custom data frame layout made for N591UA (UA93) by United Airlines.

UA93 and AA77 are both 757-200's (not "757-2's"), they use different DFL's because they are not the same exact aircraft nor record the same exact parameters.

In case you're still confused -

AA77 records the Flight Deck Door.

UA93 does not.

Hope this clears it up for you.

just because the recorder has the parameter for it, does not mean that it was ACTIVE
since that FDR showed the door being closed for over 20 hours it shows that while the FDR had the parameter, the door itself did not have the sensor