1. NoParty

    NoParty Senior Member

    I'm not sure exactly where this should go...
    but when I ran across it today, I was reminded of Cube's interesting comments...

    "We will fly a fully loaded 747 into a building at 500 MPH"

    p.s. And no, I don't think it would be in any way definitive, nor do I think it would ever actually happen...
    Last edited by a moderator: May 17, 2016
  2. Auldy

    Auldy Senior Member

    Flexible funding. Asking for 1.5 million.... seems like an unobtainable/unrealistic goal and they get to keep the money regardless of success. Obviously well thought out (sarcasm).

    Last edited: May 17, 2016
  3. Leifer

    Leifer Senior Member

    I doubt this will be allowed to happen, even just for safety sake.
    And if is not allowed to happen....whose fault will it be ?

    It's a good effort, though likely doomed to fail, logistically. first and foremost.

    Many of these funding projects seem to be "temporary income" for the funding promoters.
    Last edited: May 17, 2016
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    I'd say the most likely thing going on here is that he's trying to drum up some viral views for his video channel.

    Much as I would love to see such an experiment, it's simply not realistic. Even if he did raise $1.5M (which he obviously won't), that's probably far too low a budget to do it properly. A used working 767 is more like $6 Million, and there are far more to the costs than just buying a plane.

    It's just silly - but perhaps useful for making people think about just how impractical a test it would be.


    • Agree Agree x 3
  5. Leifer

    Leifer Senior Member

    I agree. He is using overly popular semi-controvercial issues found on crowdfunding and youtube, to popularize himself on social media.
    He's a novice on his topics.

  6. NoParty

    NoParty Senior Member

    I got through 2.5 minutes...enough to realize he's just half-assing it...doesn't even seem to know what "conspiracy" means.

    p.s. My initial post was kind of a happy response to one or two posters regularly wanting major re-creations
    to somehow prove that they saw what they saw on 9/11. My angle is not the funding, but the futility of hoping
    that "truthers" will accept any evidence that contradicts the narrative they're so invested in. No building will
    suffice as similar enough to the WTC, etc.
    Last edited: May 17, 2016
    • Like Like x 1
  7. deirdre

    deirdre Moderator Staff Member

    i wonder what the chances are that when you jump out of a 767 you get split in two by the tail piece.
    • Funny Funny x 1
  8. Auldy

    Auldy Senior Member

    Start a indiegogo fundraising campaign asking the same question to find out.
    • Like Like x 1
  9. Keith Beachy

    Keith Beachy Active Member

    What are the scrap metal value for a 747/757/767? If it is not much, then the last flight, a one time last flight plane with old engines, etc, might be possible to buy;but... How much does it cost to install remote control? How much did NASA spend on remote control for the fuel additive test when they dutch rolled and kind of crashed.

    Dutch Roll mode, oops. They wanted a better landing.
    I can see a failed remote control.
    I propose someone gets some physics lessons, studies steel and fire science, and then looks at video of 9/11, read NIST, read FEMA, read the hundred of rational studies and papers on 911, and stop being whatever it is that makes someone fail to figure out 9/11 after 14 years.

    Did this guy discover the 9/11 truth evidence free claims for the first time?
  10. NoParty

    NoParty Senior Member

    Well there's a cool thought:

    A767 on it's last legs, fueled to the brim, flying over a city, piloted by a remote system bought on the cheap... :eek:
  11. deirdre

    deirdre Moderator Staff Member

    he siad they are gonna use auto pilot. of course he is laughing throughout the entire video.
  12. deirdre

    deirdre Moderator Staff Member

    this is why i suggested you lay out the claims in the Op. he said "in the country side"... cause of all those abandoned WTC sized buildings in the countryside of tiwan thailand.
    Last edited: May 17, 2016
    • Funny Funny x 1
  13. NoParty

    NoParty Senior Member

    I won't lie: It was too silly for me to get all the way through it.
    I was just providing the premise for a poster who kept asking for such a thing.
    The "over a city" was just my first mental image, following Keith. And to be fair, not a lot of tall buildings "in the country side"

    In my defense, the "Op" didn't begin as an Op :p
    Last edited: May 17, 2016
  14. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    You'd need a building that was a mile from anything. It's not possible.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  15. Leifer

    Leifer Senior Member

    Is it possible for "anyone" to buy a flyable 747 ?

    I'm guessing you'd need to re-register it, re-certification for flight, assurance of maintenance, declaration of usage, licenses, permits, apply a pilot, etc.....I imagine it's not an easy task.
    Especially after 911.


    Is insurance required to fly it? (even if it's paid-in-full, with cash ?)
    Liability insurance might be required, and be a big barrier.......especially if you intend to crash it.

    After all, I can't drive a car, without liability insurance.

    (is liability insurance, a global coverage ?)
    I'm rambling again....
    Last edited: May 18, 2016
  16. tinkertailor

    tinkertailor Senior Member

    I tried to hunt a few down just for the fun of it...
    The lowest price for a 747 on this site is this one with no picture, at a crisp $1.9M:
    Most of the others on there make you call for the price (never a good sign if you're on a budget) and/or are way expensive.
    Evidently a lot of people want to buy these things to turn into houses/bars/nightclubs/hotels/etc, and the biggest expense is moving the things.
    I may not be a 9/11 truther, but it seems like you could get a lot more bang for your buck if you asked for, say, 150 grand and made a few incredible scale models.
    (this is also my 100th post here, yay!)
    • Agree Agree x 1
  17. Leifer

    Leifer Senior Member

    I kinda don't want to know.... which airlines (if any) buy unwanted planes....except in cases if a company folds, and there's an asset sell-off.
  18. tinkertailor

    tinkertailor Senior Member

    I mean, buying a '99 Subaru Forester is a risk, even with it in peak condition mechanically. You know those head gaskets are going to blow one day...
    A gigantic metal bullet carrying fuel, flying with complicated controls into a building of some sort?
    That's a really big nope.
  19. Hofnarr

    Hofnarr Member

    Woah, where did that come from?
    Well, would be the first CT-guy wanting to do something (although it smells really scamy)

    Why won't the chemtrail people do something like this? Would by way les pricey to fund some contrail-testing.
  20. Auldy

    Auldy Senior Member

    Part of me hopes he does raise the $1.5 million, then adds a couple of stretch goals, and ends up with enough money to:

    - obtain a similar plane to the 9/11 attacks.
    - obtain/construct a replica of one of the towers, safely in the middle of nowhere.
    - obtain all necessary permits, licenses and permission from the applicable country to actually carry out his test.
    - obtain the necessary technology and expertise to carry out the test.
    - actually carry out the test.

    Then we would have a full scale replica and fulfil all the right conditions that truthers constantly bring up, the crash could happen, the destruction and inevitable collapse could occur, and the theory could be put to rest once and for all. No more wasting time and brain power on saddening 9/11 conspiracy theories.
  21. Leifer

    Leifer Senior Member

    All that work and $$ for something that already happened ?....to justify it to a small percentage of truthers ?
    It's obvious I don't understand, and may not be important to me.
    If realized....there are so many variables and unrealistic results, that neither side would be happy.
    ....and the debate would continue.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  22. tinkertailor

    tinkertailor Senior Member

    Yes, that would be nice and relieving in a 'case closed' way.
    It might also be an, erm, shall we say, entertaining experience if all he could afford was a little retired crop duster from Idaho and a long-abandoned mid-'70s tax assessors' office in a tiny Iowan town. The crop duster launches, coughs, soars towards the building, stutters and falls, skittering on concrete, gently nudging the building with its nose.
    The only destruction is a single windowpane falling on to the shag carpet within. A sleepy possum toddles out the side door and blinks at the plane, then goes back in.
    And that's it.
    • Like Like x 2
    • Funny Funny x 1
  23. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    He's actually not a conspiracy theorist, or at least not a "no normal planer", and says later in the video that he expects the physics to turn out as they did on 9/11
    Of course they won't as you can't actually replicate the physics at that price point. And certainly not for the $1,500 which is the more realistic amount he's going to raise.

    Although the Daily Mail might give him a bump:

    Yesterday there was a reply from him asking them to link to his Indigogo campaign, but that seems to be gone.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  24. tadaaa

    tadaaa Active Member

    This guy was interviewe on BBC Radio last night (the actual program is called "Up all Night" with Rod Sharp - BBC Radio 5)

    BBC Radio 5 is a prestigious national radio station in the UK btw (I believe they may make a podcast of the show available)

    Obviously I was only half listening as it was 3.00am and I was semi asleep, but my ears pricked up as I heard talk of abandoned sky scrapers in China - Rod Sharp seemed slightly incredulous about it all

    just as the interview was ending, the guy obviously got in the fact that the funding site pulled his initiative just as it was taking big money donations

    In a "just sayin" kinda way
    Last edited: May 19, 2016
  25. deirdre

    deirdre Moderator Staff Member

    yea his youtube channel says that now too.
    Last edited: May 19, 2016
  26. tadaaa

    tadaaa Active Member

    the problem is I did not hear the whole interview Deirdre, my attention was spiked by the talk of abandoned Chinese city's and the ready availability of high rise buildings

    I (rightly) guessed it was Paul Salo taking about this plan (as I had seen this thread the day before)

    but it was sort of the end of the interview,

    he said there was ALOT of interest in it, especially from pressure groups (veterans etc) how he was in a plane (I think) on 911, so was personal to him etc etc

    he had no axe to grind!!! - although I did then hear him complain about the funding being pulled etc etc

    the biggest surprise was have a metabunk thread discussed on BBC radio!!!!
    • Like Like x 1
  27. Trailspotter

    Trailspotter Senior Member

    You can listen it again for 29 days left at:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07bbw22#play from 03:06:00
    • Useful Useful x 1
  28. Nada Truther

    Nada Truther Active Member

    I believe that the 747 and 767 are not the same basic airplane. Wouldn't that just fuel both sides of the argument that the airplanes were not the same, so the test is not accurate? Can you set a plane to "Auto-pilot" and have it take- off, maneuver, and fly straight enough to hit the target accurately? I would think he might mean "remote control". Does smashing into a building, that is probably not a tube structure, set for demolition in Thailand, instead of a still functional tube structure in the heart of NYC seem like the same parameters? How tall is this building in the "country" going to be? 110 stories?

    I feel as if I've already given this guy too much of my attention. Too much time that I will never get back.
  29. qed

    qed Senior Member

    Just got my $5000 refund from Indiegogo.
    • Funny Funny x 2
  30. NoParty

    NoParty Senior Member

    If the "test" were done, and it 100% matched what we all saw on 9/11,
    there would immediately be no less than 100 complaints about the size of the plane,
    the height of the building, the contents of the plane, the contents of the building,
    etc., etc., etc.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  31. tadaaa

    tadaaa Active Member

    Isn't the 747 a jumbo jet, hence much much larger than the planes that hit the towers
  32. Keith Beachy

    Keith Beachy Active Member

    Don't tell him the 747 is not the same plane used on 9/11, or 757s and 767s were used... tell him after he buys the 747.

    Plus. Don't tell him the claims by 911 truth are all fantasy, and have no evidence.
    • Funny Funny x 3
  33. econ41

    econ41 Active Member

    Yes. 757 and 767 are about half the size of the first model 747s in terms of both empty and fully loaded take off weights.
  34. Hofnarr

    Hofnarr Member

  35. tadaaa

    tadaaa Active Member

    post removed
    Last edited: May 20, 2016
  36. Svartbjørn

    Svartbjørn Senior Member

    The biggest problem Im seeing from this, is the fact that the only way theyll be able to crash an aircraft into a building WITHOUT KILLING ANYONE, is to do it with some form of remote control, which will then only fuel the hologram/RC aircraft theories to a Ft McMurray size blaze. It wont solve or prove anything, just make the situation worse.
    • Like Like x 1
  37. tinkertailor

    tinkertailor Senior Member

    That is, unless they find someone to go full Randy-Quaid-In-Independence-Day on it for the good of the truth.:rolleyes:
  38. NoParty

    NoParty Senior Member

    Here in the States we have a bunch of members of Congress who could probably stand to get out more...
  39. Efftup

    Efftup Senior Member

    on the radio show he was talking about someone setting autopilot and then parachuting out. he clearly has no clue whatsoever.
    • Funny Funny x 1