Momopi, this only takes two seconds to answer

[Winston]

Momopi, you said you don't want to answer questions about 9/11 unless you're paid to cause you consider it a waste of time. How about a question that only takes two seconds to answer then?

Question: Do you believe that a hijacker who has NEVER flown a 757 before can perform maneuvers that 30 year Airline veterans and Air Force TOP GUN pilots say that they can't perform? Maneuvers that the best pilot only has a 1 in 10 or 1 in 20 chance of making? Yes or no?

If yes, then you lost your marbles. If no, then you admit that the official 9/11 story doesn't add up for many reasons.

Take your pick.

There is no way out of this.

[momopi]

There is no way out of this.

1. Are you in any position of authority to demand an answer?

2. Look up "presupposition"

3. Please submit payment to my paypal account for this reply.


Just in case if you're going to complain that you're not getting your money's worth:

* Any opinions expressed (by pilots or anyone else) outside of a court (or congressional inquiry) is hearsay and not admissible. For major investigations the court (or President or congressional panel) will appoint their own experts. There are over 610,000 actively registered pilots today and the military alone has few thousand combat pilots. Adding the retired pilots, there are probably over 1 million aviators in the country with some flight experience. Any pilot can express any opinion for cherry picking, so whoever you decide to use must carry enough weight. For example, the Rogers Commission called upon Niel Armstrong to serve as the vice-chair, because his opinion carries a lot of weight. One Chuck Yeager is worth more than all the pilots on "Pilots for 9/11 truth" combined.

* If you're going to say that someone could not have perform a certain action, you don't ever want to use anyone who's going to say something like "one in ten chance". That's like saying "he might have gotten lucky".

[Winston]

PayPal for answering a yes or no question that only takes two seconds?!

If you can't take two seconds to answer yes or no, then this isn't about money. It's about psychological block, ridicule, denial and inability to face the truth on your part. That's my psychoanalysis.

Can you answer an even simpler question?

Why do you have a religious need to believe a conspiracy theory just cause you heard it on CNN, which is propagated by a proven and known pathological liar like George Bush? Why? Why are the words of aa known liar infallible to you and above question? Why?

[Winston]

Just in case if you're going to complain that you're not getting your money's worth:

* Any opinions expressed (by pilots or anyone else) outside of a court (or congressional inquiry) is hearsay and not admissible. For major investigations the court (or President or congressional panel) will appoint their own experts. There are over 610,000 actively registered pilots today and the military alone has few thousand combat pilots. Adding the retired pilots, there are probably over 1 million aviators in the country with some flight experience. Any pilot can express any opinion for cherry picking, so whoever you decide to use must carry enough weight. For example, the Rogers Commission called upon Niel Armstrong to serve as the vice-chair, because his opinion carries a lot of weight. One Chuck Yeager is worth more than all the pilots on "Pilots for 9/11 truth" combined.

* If you're going to say that someone could not have perform a certain action, you don't ever want to use anyone who's going to say something like "one in ten chance". That's like saying "he might have gotten lucky".

That makes no sense. This is not a courtroom. How can it be?

These pilots know more about flying than you. So why don't you humble yourself and listen to them?

Here's a challenge for you: Name some experienced decorated pilots who believe that a 757 can fly at 500mph 6 feet off the ground. And who will claim that an amateur pilot can do a 270 degree loop in a 757 at 500mph while descending.

If you can't, then again, you lose the argument.

Why can't you answer questions honestly without obfuscation?

[Winston]

There is no way out of this.

1. Are you in any position of authority to demand an answer?

2. Look up "presupposition"

3. Please submit payment to my paypal account for this reply.

You didn't even answer the question.

How come I don't have a problem dodging questions and you do? I answer all serious questions directly without ambiguity or obfuscation.

Isn't that indicative that the truth isn't on your side?

[momopi]

Can you answer an even simpler question?

1. Where's the money?

2. Your question was a presupposition.
plurium interrogationum: "are you still beating your wife?"

3. Hobbies (ad libitum) are free. Not a hobby = work.
Answering argumentum ad nauseam is not a hobby, and therefore I need to be compensated for my time.

That makes no sense. This is not a courtroom. How can it be?
These pilots know more about flying than you. So why don't you humble yourself and listen to them?
Here's a challenge for you: Name some experienced decorated pilots who believe that a 757 can fly at 500mph 6 feet off the ground. And who will claim that an amateur pilot can do a 270 degree loop in a 757 at 500mph while descending.

I'm not humble because it's not my job to be humble. My job as a consultant is to arrive at your facility and bill you $800 to $1200/day plus expenses to tell you that you're wrong. Unfortunately I only get a cut of that, but such is life.

In many countries the national airline and the military air force is closely connected, because that's where pilots go after leaving military service. Civilian airlines like military pilots because they come with a lot of experience and flight hours. Around the globe there are tens of thousands of commercial aircraft, in the US alone on an average day there are some 3,700 aircraft in the sky. Pilots with 20+ years of experience and military aviation background are dime a dozen.

Take for example, this guy claims that he has 27 years of flight experience, first with the Italian air force flying NATO AWACS and maritime patrol planes at very low altitudes. After he left the military he worked for civilian airline and as a flight instructor:
http://www.911myths.com/Another_Expert.pdf

Guy went as far as posting his photo and certifications:
http://www.911myths.com/html/giulio_bernacchia.html

But you know what, he's just another old geezer expressing his opinion. Same with the US navy pilot or anyone else who wants to give their 2 penny's worth. This is where one "expert opinion" is not valued higher than another, so you need to either find someone with higher prestige value, or have peer-review. My amateur opinion is that the most qualified people to speak on this topic are experienced test pilots like David Cooley. Test pilots are crazy and make planes do what they're not supposed to. Words is that David Cooley was flying his F-22 upside down toward a tank target on the ground, via previously untried approach vector and didn't make it, ending his 27-year career. Fighter pilots depend on people like him to establish "safe" and "permitted" maneuvers in their combat aircraft.


During the final days of WW2, the desperate Japanese employed Kamikaze's to ram into US ships. By this time the bulk of Japan's well trained aviators had died and the kamikaze's were poorly trained on the ground with primitive simulators. They didn't have the spare fuel for many training flights. These guys were basically amateurs and approx. 14% of them managed to get through US aircraft and defense anti-aircraft guns to score hits on allied ships. About 8.5% of all ships hit by Kamikaze's sank.

The point I'm trying to make is that if you're trying to prove statistical significance, you don't want an "expert testimony" that gives you p-value of 0.1. You're a business major so you should have studied this in school. Also, expert opinions are opinions not necessarily facts, see “Lady and the Tea� example I cited earlier.

[Winston]

That doesn't answer the questions.

You said so yourself that a doctor knows more than me and you about health right? So why doesn't an experienced pilot know more than YOU about flying?

Ok so tell me then, where are the pilots who claim that it is easy and possible to fly 757's at 500mph just ten feet above ground?

Where are the pilots who say that any pilot who trained on a small Cessna plane can jump into the cockpit of a 757 for the FIRST TIME and fly it and do acrobatic maneuvers on it, like 270 spiral loops?!?!?!

Where are the expert pilots who say that?

Can you or any official believer fly a plane at 500mph ten feet above ground? If not, then you lose. It's aerodynamically impossible.

Why don't you concede that? It's a valid point.

Also, what about the NORAD tactical director I showed you, who said that there is no way that four planes off course would not be intercepted, unless someone in high places told NORAD to stand down? Doesn't a NORAD tactical director or FAA traffic controller, know more than you? Don't they know what they're talking about?

[momopi]

That doesn't answer the questions.

If you don't accept the answer, that's your problem, not mine.