|
Korean Job Discussion Forums "The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Gopher

Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
Posted: Wed Apr 12, 2006 2:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
EFLtrainer wrote: |
...there *may* be some interesting revisions to textbooks in the future. |
Doubt it.
Last edited by Gopher on Sun Jun 11, 2006 9:24 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Bulsajo

Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
Posted: Wed Apr 12, 2006 2:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
EFLtrainer wrote: |
Blah, blah, blah... Your question implies an assumption on your part. you did not ask, "What do you think about it." You asked a skewed question, thus, your not "just" asking, and I'm not interested in a debate about the veracity of the video nor about the conspiracy theory, which is why I stated there *may* be some interesting revisions to textbooks in the future.
Try to keep up. |
And yet you continue to dodge the question, so here it is again:
Why do you feel the missing 5 frames was important enough to warrant a mention in your post?
What did you expect/suspect those frames to show, or not show?
You brought this up in your initial post on the subject, I'm just trying to figure out why. It was an honest question, perhaps it was unkindly worded (arguable, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt), so I'm trying to correct that now.
Or, alternately: have you seen the links MindMeToo and I have posted, and now no longer feel this is an issue?
That's fine too.
I have to admit that the more you seem to dodge, more curious I have become in hearing the answer.
Human nature, I guess. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
igotthisguitar

Joined: 08 Apr 2003 Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)
|
Posted: Thu Apr 13, 2006 12:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Bulsajo wrote: |
Why do you feel the missing 5 frames was important enough to warrant a mention in your post? What did you expect/suspect those frames to show, or not show? |
Shades of DEALEY PLAZA, why were the videos which are believed to have captured "the object" on film confiscated by the FBI never to be returned?
Hmmmmmm ... yes. As you said, it's only natural for people to wonder why. Keeping the bastards honest.
HUNT THE BOEING
As everyone knows, on 11 September, less than an hour after the attack on the World Trade Centre, an airplane collided with the Pentagon. The Associated Press first reported that a booby-trapped truck had caused the explosion. The Pentagon quickly denied this.
The official US government version of events still holds.
Here's a little game for you: Take a look at these photographs and try to find evidence to corroborate the official version. It's up to you to Hunt the Boeing!
http://www.asile.org/citoyens/numero13/pentagone/erreurs_en.htm
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=find+boeing+pentagon+crash |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee

Joined: 25 May 2003
|
Posted: Fri Apr 14, 2006 12:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/blflight77.htm
Dear Reader:
"Hunt the Boeing!" is a provocative display of smoke and mirrors, but there's little else to recommend the site. Its authors present a fraction of the available evidence in a highly selective, distorted, titillating way, proving absolutely nothing — except, perhaps, that there's always room for another conspiracy theory.
While making few explicit allegations, the authors argue, in effect, that based on photographic and physical evidence, the damage sustained by the Pentagon on September 11, 2001 could not have been caused by a crashing jetliner, contrary to the official and overwhelmingly accepted explanation.
The argument is weak. For starters, it conveniently ignores some of the most obvious, compelling evidence. For example:
Eyewitness testimony of bystanders who saw and/or heard American Airlines Flight 77 approach and collide with the Pentagon
The recovery of both black boxes belonging to the Boeing 757 from the Pentagon wreckage
The recovery and identification of the remains of all but one of the people known to be aboard Flight 77
Of course, evading bedrock evidence is standard procedure for conspiracy theorists. If pressed, they would doubtless claim that all of the above must have been planted or manufactured, but they can't even prove such a claim plausible, let alone true beyond a reasonable doubt.
An improbably successful cover-up
Make no mistake, the burden of proof is on the conspiracy theorists, whose case presupposes that all of the hundreds of people who participated in the clean-up, recovery and investigation following the 9/11 Pentagon attack — including scientists, engineers, coroners and professional air disaster investigators — are either dead wrong or participating in a massive, improbably successful government cover-up.
Eschewing plain facts and common sense, the conspiracy theorists ask us to focus instead on misleadingly posed condundrums such as the following:
Question: "Can you explain how a Boeing 757-200, weighing nearly 100 tons and travelling at a minimum speed of 250 miles an hour only damaged the outside of the Pentagon?"
Answer: It didn't only damage the outside. According to the Washington Post, structural damage extended at least 150 feet inside, well into the third ("C") ring of the building.
Question: "Can you explain how a Boeing 14.9 yards high, 51.7 yards long, with a wingspan of 41.6 yards and a cockpit 3.8 yards high, could crash into just the ground floor of this building?"
Answer: It didn't just crash into the ground floor. According to official statements and news reports, it took out both the first and second floors on impact.
Question: "Can you find debris of a Boeing 757-200 in this photograph?"
Answer: No, but we can in this one credited to a U.S. Navy photographer [enlarged version]. Bear in mind, eyewitnesses say the Boeing 757 virtually disintegrated when it struck the reinforced wall of the building. Given that, and the tremendous forward momentum of the aircraft on impact, the assumption that a significant amount of debris ought to be visible in front of the Pentagon wouldn't seem justified.
According to a CNN article published the day after the attack, Michael Tamillow, a battalion chief of the Fairfax County, Virginia Fire Department, reported that parts of the Boeing 757 fuselage had indeed been recovered from the wreckage by FBI investigators (the same team that later found the black boxes). "No large pieces apparently survived," the article said.
One visitor who surveyed the crash site a few days later, Representative Judy Biggert of Illinois, told reporters she saw remnants of the jetliner: "There was a seat from a plane," she said, "there was part of the tail and then there was a part of green metal, I could not tell what it was, a part of the outside of the plane." (Chicago Sun-Times, 16 Sep, 2001)
About Poll
Do you believe AA Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon?
Yes.
No.
I'm not sure.
Current Results
Here's one obvious question the conspiracy theorists don't ask and certainly could not answer in any compelling way: If American Airlines Flight 77 didn't crash into the Pentagon, what did happen to the jetliner and all its passengers? Did it vanish into thin air?
(For a more detailed consideration of these and other "Hunt the Boeing" puzzles, please read the excellent commentary by engineer Paul Boutin and astrophysicist Patrick Di Justo.)
A conspiracy theory in the grand tradition
You're no doubt wondering who's behind these flights of fancy and what, exactly, they're driving at. Well, according to the French newspaper Le Monde, the culprit is Thierry Meyssan, well-known leftist radical and president of the Voltaire Network, a controversial site devoted to "the fight for freedom and secularity." His son, Rapha? Meyssan, is credited as the Webmaster of both the Voltaire Network and Utopian Asylum, which, uncoincidentally, hosts "Hunt the Boeing!"
What are they trying to prove? That the attacks of September 11 were perpetrated not by foreign terrorists, but by the U.S. government upon its own citizens — a conspiracy theory in the grand tradition.
To quote the late Carl Sagan, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof."
So far we haven't seen any proof at all.
Sources and further reading:
Hunt the Boeing!
The original site on Asile.org
'Hunt the Boeing' Answers
Debunked by Paul Boutin and Patrick Di Justo
'Hunt the Boeing!'
Debunked by the Urban Legends Reference Pages
Un avion a bel et bien frapp?le Pentagone
From Le Monde, 20 March 2002 (in French)
Internet v?icule une rumeur extravagante sur le 11 septembre
From Le Monde, 20 March 2002 (in French)
No Hope of Finding More Survivors at Pentagon
From CNN, 12 Sep 2001
Images Show September 11 Pentagon Crash
From CNN, 8 March 2002
Interactive Look at Pentagon Attack
From USA Today
The Battle-Scarred Pentagon
From Jane's Information Group, 13 Sep 2001
Rebuilding the Pentagon
Graphics showing structural damage caused by Flight 77, from the Washington Post
Experts ID 184 Pentagon Fatalities
Armed Forces Institute of Pathology
The Pentagon: Facts & Figures
Offical Pentagon statistics |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|