My Yahoo 9/11 Questions on Answers yahoo com

Subject: Reply Part 2

Message: The AP, CNN, CBS and NBC all mistakenly reported the collapse of 7 World Trade Center hours before the BBC. The BBC report only became famous because Dylan Avery was too lazy a researcher to discover the other reports. But I have to ask again, so what? What are you alleging this means? Why should we care? Why is this error so much more important than the thousand other flawed reports the media made in the chaos and confusion of that day? I have a plausible, evidence-based explanation for why the BBC and the other outlets made the mistakes they did. Do you?

In summary, is there any time where we can actually expect you to get to the point and present a clear, comprehensive, evidence-based hypothesis that covers everything we know happened on 9/11 or are you going to endlessly cherry-pick anomalies you can’t explain like all those who have failed before you? If it’s the former I am all ears. If the latter I have absolutely no interest.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Reply:
Do you have links for AP, CNN, CBS and NBC? Do they provide a single source?
Do you think the police would be interested in knowing who supplied these early reports? Did they even bother to look? Did anyone checkout who was behind these predictions?
_________________________________________________________________________________________

Subject: Reply Part 1

Message: I know very well what “hand-off” means. I am wondering if you do. So far you have not established an evidence-based claim that any calls should have been handed off nor have you explained why we should care if they should have and were not. So what if one call was 192 seconds long, does that mean it should have been handed off? How would you know? To determine that you would need to determine the exact location of each tower, what their operating range was and then match that to the timeline of the movements of Flight 175 and of any phone calls in dispute. You might even want to explain why a high decent rate (far less than 10k ft/min BTW since 175 was at 12,900ft at 9:00am and had 3 more minutes to descend to just under 1,000ft) would interrupt an air phone transmission. I personally can think of no reason known to physics why this would be an issue. If you find an anomaly then you have to posit plausible explanations – backed by evidence – as to why such an anomaly might occur and what, if any significance that has.

Have you done that?

No? Then why are you bothering us with your unfounded assumptions based on no evidence.

And no, don’t send me to another moronic, completely unwatchable Youtube video. That hasn’t worked for 9/11 Truth for 12 years and it ain’t gonna work today.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Reply:

“far less than 10k ft/min BTW since 175 was at 12,900ft at 9:00am

I believe the call started before that 8:57 and at that time it was much higher because that was “the dive” no one witnessed from the ground, heard or felt in the while calling from the air. Its fake! 

Do you know where the Cell tower is given that the I.D is known via the DOJ report?
Who would know this information?  

(The NTSB places the crash time at 9:02:40)
“12,900ft at 9:00am and had 3 more minutes to descend to just under 1,000ft) would interrupt an air phone transmission”

I was talking about the caller. All these people were dropping and they must have been feeling some G-forces. Was any of this recorded in their voices?

The point is the whole DOJ report is fake. The Cell Tower location is not given because it leads back to a military base.

______________________________________________________________________________________________

From: The Groovemeister
Message: The human body is not exposed to a lot of G during a fast descent. I’ve flown stunt planes so I kinda have some relevent experience here. It’s the rapid climb that makes you feel G. Either way, a rapid decent is not going to terminate a phone call or cause it to switch towers and I believe the basis of your claim is that you find it suspicious this one phone call was not handed off between towers. As yet you have presented not a shred of evidence that it should have been or explained what it means if it wasn’t.

And no, I do not see any logical reason why the police or any other investigative body would be interested in inaccurate live news reports. The very idea boggles the mind. Once again I have to ask why you think mistaken news reports are significant and why pick on just this one case? Why not pick on the news reports that a truck bomb blew up the Jefferson building in Washington DC? Heck, why not pick on the very first report I heard that day – that a small Cessna had hit the WTC? Again, what is the piont? Why should we care?
________________________________________________________________________________

Reply

“inaccurate live news reports”
the issue is the news reported ACCURATE news. What was inaccurate about WTC 7? Indira Singh said the building 7 was … what? Indira Singh WTC building 7 “We are going to have to bring it down”

Look up “Roller Coaster G-forces” and tell me people on a roller coasters could make a perfect reasonable phone calls.

I asked about the Cell towers location given the I.D is known. Why are you avoiding that question???

_______________________________________________________________________________

From: The Groovemeister

I don’t particularly care what you believe. I am interested in what you can prove. If you can prove the call began at 8:57am then provide your evidence and then explain why that is important. If you believe no one witnessed the decent from the ground then explain why JFK ATC had a visual on 175 for at least the last 3 minutes of its flight.

Or are you still trying to twist the evidence to conform to your belief rather than starting with the evidence and letting that inform your conclusion? You are never going to find out what really happened doing that.

DOJ Report
/9-11-and-ground-zero/2013/11/911-doj-says-one-cell-tower-to-call-them-all-on-911-zero-cellur-handoffs-2440420.html

_______________________________________________________________________________
Reply

 If you can prove the call began at 8:57am ?

Yes you subtract from DOJ 9:00 End time and then use the length of 192 seconds. Page 3

http://docsteach.org/documents/2609807/detail?menu=closed&page=221

You get 8:57 am.

10,000 feet per minute DROP gives the rate of speed not the total distance traveled.

If I said 60 MPH does that mean I traveled 60 miles? NO

I don’t know if you having trouble the NO part or the handoff part.

If search for the word “NO” right next to that word is ?

They are talking about two stations BOTH WITH NO HANDOFF’S.
At incredible altitudes and during a dive. No missed connections. Perfect voices and no stress.
It’s a fake report!

JFK ATC had a visual on 175 ??

12.75 Miles away.

http://www.daftlogic.com/projects-google-maps-distance-calculator.htm

Anyway NIST provided new photo of “flight 175″
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0pxVbXyB9OLMkFaWE45bGZsVjQ/edit?usp=sharing
all others were removed.
_________________________________________________________________________________

On 9/11 WTC 7 started Flashing, was that because people were signaling for help inside the building?
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Aqm..KgyfH3BsY0iDfBt9TLT5gt.;_ylv=3?qid=20131201095014AA6CE5U
_________________________________________________________________________________

The Groovemeister

Subject: Re: WTC 7 No Fire Seen and its the front

Message: You are now officially the dumbest human being on the planet. You don’t have even the slightest clue what a pathetic case you have built here. You troll the internet thinking you are this great champion for truth and justice when really you just spew laughably implausible nonsense.

You wouldn’t recognize the truth if smacked you upside your miserable empty head. I am so done with you.