Methusala

I think that the late Tony Hayes was responsible for these but I haven't heard anything since he passed away.

Wow! I'd give (almost) anything for a pod like that.

And my point is that you could have given the link. I apologise for being blunt. Gets me into much trouble. Will try to improve my behavior. Don

Thanks (but NO thanks) for wasting a bucket full of bandwidth. And your point is exactly?

My EIS digital display engine information system has programmable limits and a flashing alarm light. The light continues to flash until you acknowledge it and then remains steadily illuminated until readings return to below set limit.

Exhaust failure can happen suddenly and severely. I was once flying from Tumut to home base when the dot went black. Opened the fresh air vents and did mental arithmetic and touching finger tips, nose and other extremities (NO! Not that one!) and landed to find a large chunk of exhaust pipe had detached on a sharp bend. This was the $5 detector and about 18 months old so they do work.

Hey Frank, look at your phone messages to see what I've been up to. Rhonda and I will see you 2 soon. Don

Sq/Ldr Mick Parer also was a victim of MND. Flew as leader of Black Diamonds display team. RIP both.

See ya later...Elvis is leaving you all to it.

Have heard it postulated that the buildings were designed with eventual demolition in mind. Israeli firm had the security contract over the centre. Sounds crazy, I know, but lifespan of buildings is not now unlimited. If there is any truth in this then it could be a plus to a future buyer. As stated, WTC 7 came down with no aircraft collision and the owner deciding to "pull it " 30 mins before it collapsed in a controlled demolition. Pools of molten steel were found in the rubble of the 2 towers. Molten steel!

This is where a conclusion is arrived at via false logic or evidence. Meaning - Doesn't follow. Cognitive dissonance - The belief in a principle when all evidence is to the contrary. To my knowledge, the only conclusion that I have drawn is that the official explanation for the 9/11 disaster is nonsense ie. It stinks! Fact: The maximum flame temperature increase for burning hydrocarbons (jet fuel) in air is, thus, about 1,000°C—hardly sufficient to melt steel at 1,500°C. Fact: There has been no known collapse of steel framed high rise buildings due to fire damage before or following the WTC debacle. The 3rd building to be destroyed (WTC 7) on that day was not even hit by anything except (possibly) some debris from the twin towers' collapse hours beforehand. It suffered some localised fire damage to a few floors. That these buildings collapsed at free fall velocity on their own footprint is ONLY possible if they had been demolished by controlled explosive demolition charges. Fact; Silverstein leased the center some 6 months before the event. He had insured it against terrorist attack for $3.2bn. On the afternoon of 9/11 he is on public record as saying,"We decided to pull it". About 30 mins later it collapsed (guess what?), on its own footprint as had towers 1 & 2 earlier that day. How can a decision signaled by the phrase,"pull it" be followed by its total demolition 30 minutes later if it had not had the means for destruction already installed. I may not be a genius but if you can't give meaningful answers to these questions please don't label me with pathetic phrases.

The concocted 'cover story' is truly cognative dissonance.

Julian Assange, a hero of truly free speech, who is currently being treated to heinous abuse by the Brit establishment should be knighted. The British 'legal system', showing the extent of their high minded principles, won't give him the opportunity to present his defense fairly. His crime was to speak the truth to war crimes. He enabled the publication of a video showing armed troops murdering 9 defenseless individuals, including a Reuters person. This is in the public domain. For this he is detained in a maximum security cell and denied medical attention. Free speech is the cornerstone of a democracy so why the personal attacks here? Posting an opinion piece for discussion unleashed a tirade of scornful abuse on a long standing forum member. Perhaps Australia needs a 'justice system' imported from Britain along with our Head of State.

I would respectfully also argue that making gratuitous judgements on the character or motives of fellow forumites is an addmission that you have no meaningful input to add to the topic. Thanks Guys. don

Should this forum have a set of restrictive rules so that participants will never encounter opinions that conflict with their own? Like a modern version of Pravda or The Chinese Peoples Daily. Years ago, in response to such questions, Ian started What's up Australia. A number of us were pleased to remove our"offensive" discussions to that area. This has now been replaced by "Off Topic". That is where, at the kind suggestion of Willedoo, I posted this thread. I suggest that anyone who is "embarrassed" to read or comment on a wider range of topics should avoid this area "like the plague". Don

[ATTACH type=full]53482[/ATTACH]

I remain agnostic to any theory yet advanced as to the "real truth" behind the tragic events of 9/11. I address any post I've made to the collective readership on this site in an attempt to simply find the truth. So far, I find that the official version of these events is stacked with many logical inconsistencies (if not outright lies) and, given the shocking aftermath of the "War on Terror", I'd like to see a more realistic, believable explanation. So far, not at all convinced. Can anyone explain how a giant airliner striking the Pentagon can leave a "20ft hole" and no debris on the lawn? Don

I have never thought that this event didn't take place nor do I imagine that many thousands of innocent people did not die on 9/11. I need to be satisfied that the official story as reported by the inquiry stacks up to the evidence. Many sane people (not MENTALLY CHALLENGED) have a great deal of trouble believing the Warren Commission's conclusions about JFK's assassination. To be sure, it is truly a terrible idea, that such a diabolical fraud could be perpetrated on the World. I am only partially able to think of this. But I did hear the taped voice of Silverstien (the owner of the WTC complex) say about building 7,"We decided to pull it"! shortly before it collapsed. I don't see much evidence of myself being, "mentally challenged", but I do think that the current state of the world leaves me skeptical, even jaundiced at the current state of officialdom. Who could keep a straight face imagining Trump would ever be POTUS or that Biden could be entertained as the putative replacement. Just sayi'n! Don

G'day RGMA, What I see from your helpful video is that, as the F-4 impacts the stationary object at high velocity, it creates a debris field of large radius. From the clips allegedly depicting a much larger plane impacting the steel-faced skyscraper, no debris field AT ALL! How can this be. We have all, in our youth, thrown rocks into water and loved watching the splash that results therefrom. Yet a high speed collision of a fast moving airliner leaves no disturbance. Of course the debris is moving away from the target at some speed in the opposite direction from the impact. This image doesn't make sense in a physical world. Don

Thinking about the construction of a large airliner, there is a massively strong, rigid core supporting the engines and landing gear. Outboard is the outerwing which is mainly hollow containing fuel and air. These are not dense enough to penetrate the mass of concrete and steel. However the penetration of the steel facade shows clear profile of wingtips. Have to be very gullible to accept this idea. Surely the outer wings at least would fail to penetrate. Could soft butter ( thin aluminium) even at jet speed cut the knife (steel cladding)? Intriguing food for thought.

There have been many stories on the 'alternative media', that is not the News.com, ABC, Fairfax or TV, concerning the truth or otherwise of the official story relating to the destruction of the 3 WTC buildings in NY. In this article, actual people of reasonable standing, put forward opinions which, in view of their reputation, can be considered serious in nature. They are not faceless clowns hiding behind a wall of nom-de-plume anonymity; is the publisher a frivolous conspiracy purveyor? Maybe, but IMO the article seems to raise some valid questions. https://newspunch.com/cia-pilot-presents-evidence-that-no-planes-hit-towers-on-911/

I respectfully accede to your suggestion and will move my attention to an off topic post. Thanks Willedoo (even sillier nom-de-plume than Methusala {{sorry!}})

Question of missing debris aside (some very chunky hi temp resistant pieces admittedly) there is also the question how did a low time 172 student achieve some remarkable flying which seems beyond the capacity of expert air transport pilots with years experience. One stated that the required flight path would be in excess of the structural capability of the airframe.