I listened to this interview as soon as you posted this yesterday. I must confess to feeling a bit disappointed after hearing it. It wasn’t all disappointing though, in parts I felt that it reached parts that may be an answer to a lot of what goes on, but sadly, gets us no closer to justice. In my opinion justice will likely never be found in this case. It’s
too big.
Having David explain the physics of the collapse didn’t do much to change my opinion. I found myself switching off after a bit, what drew me back in was when he started to discuss the ‘Newton trumps Jung’ thing. I feel very strongly that in this event, Jung trumps Newton every day of the week, however difficult that may be for us to accept. Facts that seem to stare us in the face may be impossible to accept. In other words, if this was an evil deed, carried out largely by people we trusted, it would have to involve a deep knowledge of (dark) psychology to have succeeded.
I get your frustration at your not being sufficiently expert and finding yourself hearing one ‘expert’ say ‘this’ only to find that the next one says ‘that’, the two opinions contradicting each other. However, I think experts are not always the answer. I was a professional pilot for thirty fears, for some of that period I flew the exact types that were involved in 9/11. For my last few years I was a training captain, a Type Rating Examiner (TRE) working mainly in the simulator, flying the aeroplane one week in four. My career was ended by a stroke some years ago, at age fifty.
Like David, I have my opinion on things related to my area of expertise, such as it is, but within that area there are large swaths of ‘agnosticism’. For example, I sometimes foolishly dip my toe into discussions on forums and social media, where I can give what I
know to be facts.
One question I often see is : ‘Are the speeds of the planes involved in 9/11, that were reported to have been reached even possible.’
Only in the past few days, for the first time in years, I was reading one guys post on some 9/11 site where he was talking rubbish, so I decided to respond and add some informed opinion.
He had at some stage phoned The Boeing Company in an attempt to go to the top of the expertise pyramid - not an unreasonable thing to do. So he replied thus:
“It's not a matter of faith or conviction, Stephen.
We're talking facts and fysics here...
Listen to what people at Boeing have to say on the issue...”
This video just wound me up, so I responded:
“Joachim With respect, I listened to your video in the post above. Firstly, that Boeing lady you spoke to had no idea, like no idea. I’ve flown the Boeing 767-200 (and -300) and the barber pole Vmo is around 350 knots, as it is on other Boeing’s I’ve flown. This can easily be achieved flying level at sea level, you would have to ease off considerably on the thrust levers to stop it making a loud warning noise which we call clackers by exceeding the ‘limit’. 350knots @sea level is already slightly more than 400mph.
250kts limit is often imposed on aeroplanes flying below 10000ft in busy airspace. This has nothing to do with the planes themself, but it’s a limit to make things safer and easier to handle for the controllers.”
He hasn’t replied, he probably thinks I’m talking nonsense. The point is that when even doing something sensible like phoning Boeing doesn’t work then I’m left floundering as to what people are to do!
When I’m asked: “What is your opinion on the barely trained seemingly low ability hijacker flying a descending turn (from 7000 ft) into the pentagon”
I reply that I’d have to fly this manoeuvre in a simulator myself or see a colleague fly it to give a valid opinion. That I have many thousands of hours flying these or similar types doesn’t mean I would be able to give an opinion straight away. I always flew gently where possible, never aggressively as might be necessary to achieve the desired impact point. It isn’t that easy imo.
So while I’m an experienced pilot and supposed ‘expert’, I have definite opinions about some things but not on others that I might be expected to have.
So were left not knowing who or what to believe. In my opinion this may be deliberate. As too many unusual things happen with videos and articles and discussions where 9/11 is concerned.
Why has it become so socially unacceptable to discuss 9/11? This is a serious question that must be answered.
Thanks to all of you for seeking truth in the face of apparent insanity.