Total Posts:24|Showing Posts:1-24
Jump to topic:

I want someone to burn me on this (9-11)

cbrhawk1
Posts: 588
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/26/2012 10:41:17 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
I didn't know where to put this, so if this thread belong selsewhere, please move it.

I woke up, and, as I'm sure many do, I had random thoughts. a lot of times we forget what we instantly think about when we wake up.

But, this morning, I had a thought that hit me the instant I woke. It hit me so hard that it had to stick even as I woke up and did other things. First of all, note that, while I question the 9-11 commission report, I am not the stereotype "truther," despite the fact that I do see some of their points.

But, the question:

When the terrorists diverted the planets from their respective normal routes, how did they get the exact vectors to hit such a tiny target? From my understanding, they were hundreds of miles away. Any time an airline pilot needs a change of direction, they are given a vector and an altitude by ATC. This is because you cannot rely on landmarks very well when flying so high in the air, especially at that distance away from something.

I thought of the simulations and the games that they played, but I've done the Microsoft Flight deal, and those simulations are not satisfactory to determine vectors because, in real life, the distances and travel times are so much larger. That, and topography is exaggerated.

Someone please make me look like an idiot on this and explain it.
"All science is 'wrong.'" ~ drafterman
JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/26/2012 10:43:49 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/26/2012 10:41:17 AM, cbrhawk1 wrote:
I didn't know where to put this, so if this thread belong selsewhere, please move it.

I woke up, and, as I'm sure many do, I had random thoughts. a lot of times we forget what we instantly think about when we wake up.

But, this morning, I had a thought that hit me the instant I woke. It hit me so hard that it had to stick even as I woke up and did other things. First of all, note that, while I question the 9-11 commission report, I am not the stereotype "truther," despite the fact that I do see some of their points.

But, the question:

When the terrorists diverted the planets from their respective normal routes, how did they get the exact vectors to hit such a tiny target? From my understanding, they were hundreds of miles away. Any time an airline pilot needs a change of direction, they are given a vector and an altitude by ATC. This is because you cannot rely on landmarks very well when flying so high in the air, especially at that distance away from something.

I thought of the simulations and the games that they played, but I've done the Microsoft Flight deal, and those simulations are not satisfactory to determine vectors because, in real life, the distances and travel times are so much larger. That, and topography is exaggerated.

Someone please make me look like an idiot on this and explain it.

Wow, you are into conspiracy theories! Diverting the planets??!???! :P
twocupcakes: 15 = 13
cbrhawk1
Posts: 588
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/26/2012 10:46:44 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
I am shocked that such a small addition of a letter can make something look completely different!
"All science is 'wrong.'" ~ drafterman
JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/26/2012 10:48:34 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/26/2012 10:41:17 AM, cbrhawk1 wrote:
I didn't know where to put this, so if this thread belong selsewhere, please move it.

I woke up, and, as I'm sure many do, I had random thoughts. a lot of times we forget what we instantly think about when we wake up.

But, this morning, I had a thought that hit me the instant I woke. It hit me so hard that it had to stick even as I woke up and did other things. First of all, note that, while I question the 9-11 commission report, I am not the stereotype "truther," despite the fact that I do see some of their points.

But, the question:

When the terrorists diverted the planets from their respective normal routes, how did they get the exact vectors to hit such a tiny target? From my understanding, they were hundreds of miles away. Any time an airline pilot needs a change of direction, they are given a vector and an altitude by ATC. This is because you cannot rely on landmarks very well when flying so high in the air, especially at that distance away from something.

I thought of the simulations and the games that they played, but I've done the Microsoft Flight deal, and those simulations are not satisfactory to determine vectors because, in real life, the distances and travel times are so much larger. That, and topography is exaggerated.

Someone please make me look like an idiot on this and explain it.

I just have experience with general aviation, nothing that big. That being said, ATC is to keep things orderly, it doesn't exist because pilots can't find their way without it.

When you get your pilots license, one of the first things you do when flying commercial is learn to fly instrument only. You have to navigate without being able to look outside the windows. There are so many beacons and tools like gps, but pilots can get close enough just with a map to pick up the signals from an airport. These signals tell you whether you are coming in straight or need to correct to one side or the other, and they tell you if you are too high/too low.
twocupcakes: 15 = 13
JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/26/2012 10:49:32 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
And once you get close enough to see NYC, it's pretty much just a matter of pointing at the building.
twocupcakes: 15 = 13
thett3
Posts: 14,334
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/26/2012 10:50:50 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
First off, in real flight simulators (the kind the terrorists learned from) the distances, times, and topography are exactly as they would be from the air, because real pilots need to learn in realistic situations. I'm not sure what your question is. If it's how they got to New York, aircraft have instrumentation that tells the pilot what path to take to get to the airport of their choosing-it would be a simple matter to find the code to JFK or Laugordia airport and get to New York. Once Manhattan was in sight, presuming the altitude was not too high which it evidently was not, flying into the towers would have been a relatively simple matter.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
cbrhawk1
Posts: 588
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/26/2012 10:54:59 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
When you get your pilots license, one of the first things you do when flying commercial is learn to fly instrument only. You have to navigate without being able to look outside the windows. There are so many beacons and tools like gps, but pilots can get close enough just with a map to pick up the signals from an airport. These signals tell you whether you are coming in straight or need to correct to one side or the other, and they tell you if you are too high/too low.

Thank you.

It's an understandable explanation, and the close thing kinda makes sense, but there's one hole in that.

The airports emit signals, but did the towers emit signals as to there whereabouts? Did the terrorists have access to maps? (or can we know if they did?)
"All science is 'wrong.'" ~ drafterman
JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/26/2012 10:57:55 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/26/2012 10:54:59 AM, cbrhawk1 wrote:
When you get your pilots license, one of the first things you do when flying commercial is learn to fly instrument only. You have to navigate without being able to look outside the windows. There are so many beacons and tools like gps, but pilots can get close enough just with a map to pick up the signals from an airport. These signals tell you whether you are coming in straight or need to correct to one side or the other, and they tell you if you are too high/too low.

Thank you.

It's an understandable explanation, and the close thing kinda makes sense, but there's one hole in that.

The airports emit signals, but did the towers emit signals as to there whereabouts? Did the terrorists have access to maps? (or can we know if they did?)

The planes would have had maps for the areas they were flying to/from. Probably GPS as well.

The airports could bring anybody to the airport, but once you can see NYC it's just a matter of pointing in the right direction.

It's not that hard to pick out the WTC(wasn't too hard). Can you tell which are which?

http://www.wallcoo.net...
twocupcakes: 15 = 13
cbrhawk1
Posts: 588
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/26/2012 10:59:35 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
I might have just been thinking too much into it, as Jason does make good points.

I remember watching this old series called Air Emergency where a pilot had to navigate without radio contact to a tiny island somewhere. And, if the plane can come up with its own vectors, which I'm sure they do, then that could explain it.

I don't think that their navigation can be fully explained since I don't believe they had any commercial flight experience, it is very conceivable how they could have gotten there without an ATC vector.

My apologies wasting your time with this. It was simply a thought that overwhelmed me when I really didn't think much about it.
"All science is 'wrong.'" ~ drafterman
JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/26/2012 11:08:07 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/26/2012 10:59:35 AM, cbrhawk1 wrote:
I might have just been thinking too much into it, as Jason does make good points.

I remember watching this old series called Air Emergency where a pilot had to navigate without radio contact to a tiny island somewhere. And, if the plane can come up with its own vectors, which I'm sure they do, then that could explain it.

I don't think that their navigation can be fully explained since I don't believe they had any commercial flight experience, it is very conceivable how they could have gotten there without an ATC vector.

My apologies wasting your time with this. It was simply a thought that overwhelmed me when I really didn't think much about it.

Don't worry about it, it's a complicated matter.

An interesting note. The Mythbusters were able to land simulated 737s with no flight experience at all under 'radio direction' from a pilot. Flying isn't as hard as most people think. Landing is the hardest part.

My first flight in general aviation, I had the controls from the moment we started taxiing to the runway, I had the controls when we took off, I had the controls the whole time on a 3-hour flight, and I performed a dozen 'touch and go' landings with slight assistance from the pilot-in-command.
twocupcakes: 15 = 13
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/26/2012 11:46:03 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Also, they probably knew where their planes were heading toward after a while in air, so all they had to do was take control of a plane already in full flight, direct it toward Manhattan, and rest wouldn't be too hard.
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/26/2012 11:51:43 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/26/2012 10:41:17 AM, cbrhawk1 wrote:
When the terrorists diverted the planets from their respective normal routes, how did they get the exact vectors to hit such a tiny target?

Pretty sure they didn't divert planets.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/26/2012 11:54:35 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/26/2012 11:51:43 AM, DanT wrote:
At 5/26/2012 10:41:17 AM, cbrhawk1 wrote:
When the terrorists diverted the planets from their respective normal routes, how did they get the exact vectors to hit such a tiny target?

Pretty sure they didn't divert planets.

Dude... bro... I like, already used that one. That's like, so 60 minutes ago.
twocupcakes: 15 = 13
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/26/2012 2:25:01 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
When the terrorists diverted the planets from their respective normal routes, how did they get the exact vectors to hit such a tiny target?:

LOL, it's called Global Positioning System... maybe you've heard of it... the same way pilots have been hitting that tiny target called a "runway" for the last 40 years.

From my understanding, they were hundreds of miles away. Any time an airline pilot needs a change of direction, they are given a vector and an altitude by ATC. This is because you cannot rely on landmarks very well when flying so high in the air, especially at that distance away from something.:

Seriously, guy, how do you think pilots land planes on a friggin ocean in 30 foot seas at night?

Secondly, you saw the planes hit both towers. So you should obviously know it's more than feasible because it was demonstrated... twice.
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
Ahmed.M
Posts: 616
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/26/2012 3:01:40 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
the official 9/11 story is full of holes. How did the building collapse from fire at the top? What caused the building and foundation to crumble like that? How did terrorists hijack two commercial airplanes with nothing but box cutters? How did they pinpoint two specific buildings like that?
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/26/2012 3:08:47 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/26/2012 10:41:17 AM, cbrhawk1 wrote:
I didn't know where to put this, so if this thread belong selsewhere, please move it.

I woke up, and, as I'm sure many do, I had random thoughts. a lot of times we forget what we instantly think about when we wake up.

But, this morning, I had a thought that hit me the instant I woke. It hit me so hard that it had to stick even as I woke up and did other things. First of all, note that, while I question the 9-11 commission report, I am not the stereotype "truther," despite the fact that I do see some of their points.

But, the question:

When the terrorists diverted the planets from their respective normal routes, how did they get the exact vectors to hit such a tiny target? From my understanding, they were hundreds of miles away. Any time an airline pilot needs a change of direction, they are given a vector and an altitude by ATC. This is because you cannot rely on landmarks very well when flying so high in the air, especially at that distance away from something.

I thought of the simulations and the games that they played, but I've done the Microsoft Flight deal, and those simulations are not satisfactory to determine vectors because, in real life, the distances and travel times are so much larger. That, and topography is exaggerated.

Someone please make me look like an idiot on this and explain it.

Pilot navigation tools, which the terrorists were trained to use, could easily get them within viewing range of their monument of choice.

When they get there, they wouldn't be flying too high in the air if you're low enough to hit the building.

Think about how a pilot on manual is able to land a plan on a single air strip. Now just imagine the WTC as the beginning point of a runway. The terrorist puts the plane into descent as though it were landing, but by putting the WTC in the way, you instead get a suicide plane.
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2012 1:28:27 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/26/2012 3:01:40 PM, Ahmed.M wrote:
the official 9/11 story is full of holes. How did the building collapse from fire at the top? What caused the building and foundation to crumble like that? How did terrorists hijack two commercial airplanes with nothing but box cutters? How did they pinpoint two specific buildings like that?

Did you even bother to read the thread? Of course not.
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2012 3:02:12 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/28/2012 1:28:27 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 5/26/2012 3:01:40 PM, Ahmed.M wrote:
the official 9/11 story is full of holes. How did the building collapse from fire at the top? What caused the building and foundation to crumble like that? How did terrorists hijack two commercial airplanes with nothing but box cutters? How did they pinpoint two specific buildings like that?

Did you even bother to read the thread? Of course not.

Let's be honest: when he read "9/11" he thought "MUST POST CONSPIRACY THEORY"
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
Microsuck
Posts: 1,562
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2012 4:52:41 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/28/2012 3:02:12 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
At 5/28/2012 1:28:27 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 5/26/2012 3:01:40 PM, Ahmed.M wrote:
the official 9/11 story is full of holes. How did the building collapse from fire at the top? What caused the building and foundation to crumble like that? How did terrorists hijack two commercial airplanes with nothing but box cutters? How did they pinpoint two specific buildings like that?

Did you even bother to read the thread? Of course not.

Let's be honest: when he read "9/11" he thought "MUST POST CONSPIRACY THEORY"

And because he's a muslim, he wants to blame the us than his dictator friends.
Wall of Fail

Devil worship much? - SD
Newsflash: Atheists do not believe in the Devil! - Me
Newsflash: I doesnt matter if you think you do or not.....You do - SD

"you [imabench] are very naive and so i do not consider your opinions as having any merit. you must still be in highschool" - falconduler
bossyburrito
Posts: 14,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2012 5:09:14 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/28/2012 4:52:41 PM, Microsuck wrote:
At 5/28/2012 3:02:12 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
At 5/28/2012 1:28:27 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 5/26/2012 3:01:40 PM, Ahmed.M wrote:
the official 9/11 story is full of holes. How did the building collapse from fire at the top? What caused the building and foundation to crumble like that? How did terrorists hijack two commercial airplanes with nothing but box cutters? How did they pinpoint two specific buildings like that?

Did you even bother to read the thread? Of course not.

Let's be honest: when he read "9/11" he thought "MUST POST CONSPIRACY THEORY"


And because he's a muslim, he wants to blame the us than his dictator friends.

Oooooooooohhhh snap son
#UnbanTheMadman

"Some will sell their dreams for small desires
Or lose the race to rats
Get caught in ticking traps
And start to dream of somewhere
To relax their restless flight
Somewhere out of a memory of lighted streets on quiet nights..."

~ Rush
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2012 11:09:17 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Large airliners are easier to fly than small planes because so much is automated and the instrument displays are better. ATC rarely gives direction on how to get to a location. In an airliner, the coordinates could be punched into GPS or the frequency for a local Vortac station can be selected.

Vortac provides the distance and angle to a selected station. For example, Teterboro is near the world Trade Center, so someone could select the Teterboro vortac and fly at a constant angle to the station. Once over Teterboro, one could fly outward at the angle that crosses over the WTC. The terrorists has enough training to know how to do such a simple thing.

However, my recollection is that what they actually did to find the WTC was follow the Hudson River. The river is unmistakable and leads right to the WTC. So they went in the general direction until acquiring the river, then followed it south. Following major roads and rivers has long been a staple of small plane pilots.

Over large open farm country it's much harder to find landmarks. Drive-in movie theaters are really easy to pick out, so aviation maps show drive-ins. Alas, there aren't many drive-ins left, a major loss to general aviation. Sometimes large arrows are painted on top of water tanks to help pilots find small airports. Airliners don't need that.
cbrhawk1
Posts: 588
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2012 12:19:46 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I was thinking the Hudson River too but was wondering if they would have been too far away. I tried to look up the paths that they took to get a better idea of their situation but I can't find the route maps they used anymore probably because this is a nearly dead issue ad you don't hear much about "truthers."

The whole explanation given smells funny to me (especially since these weren't very sophisticated terrorists by the look of it), and, to give Ahmad some fairness, I'm not against the conspiracy theory, but rather I think both sides have a mountain of things to explain that I haven't seen adequate explanations for.
"All science is 'wrong.'" ~ drafterman
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2012 6:54:04 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/29/2012 12:19:46 PM, cbrhawk1 wrote:
I'm not against the conspiracy theory, but rather I think both sides have a mountain of things to explain that I haven't seen adequate explanations for.

Those that support the accepted version of events (aka the official story) have nothing left to explain. Every reasonable question that has been asked has been answered. The problem is that we still have a small segment of the population that are so emotionally vested in their conspiracy beliefs that they refuse to accept very simple and logical explanations. For them it is not about finding answers, it is about finding more questions.

If you find more satisfaction in discovering questions then you do answers, then it is obvious why you are still open to these theories. Just look at the WTC7 debate. What began with questions about loud explosions, and a building that was not hit by a plane collapsing, has turned into a discussion about little red particles found in the dust samples. Could these particles be the residue of thermite bombs? Or could it simply be a fusion of materials that we know were in WTC7 when it collapsed which had the same composition? Theorists refuse to accept the simple explanation, so instead they have scientists further examining the particles to see if it will confirm the more complicated one.

There is no mountain of things left to explain. Only questions that have already been answered, or questions that really don't need to be. It is not the burden of the government or anyone else to explain away every theory put forward by conspiracy theorists. If there was any real reason to believe the Government was involved, someone would have put forward real evidence by this point.