DEBUNKED - 9/11 aircraft black boxes weren't recovered

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
The airwaves are full of stray emissions. As a licensed ham you should be aware of RFI.

You're suggestion that only cockpit voice recorders ever transmit at 37.5 kHz is simply not realistic. Poorly designed, unfiltered, or defective radio equipment can cause harmonic interference and splatter.
37.5 Khz is the audio "ping" used for underwater detection, I think the radio beacon was probably 121.5 MHz. However no details were given of the signal "identified", so it's hard to tell what they detected, and to what quality. And of course it's possible that they detected nothing, just the person typing that got some wrong info.
 

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
Let me say first that I think the whole "conspiracy" term has been bandied about way too much. The word now immediately conjures negative connotations. A citizen should be able to question their government without instantly being labeled a "kook". We, on this site, should be able to engage in fact driven argument without labels and stereotypes. I joined this site because I am interested in a variety of issues and enjoy exploring various explanations for historical and current events and in general the discussions here seemed reasoned and respectful. In the late 60s and 70s many people, myself included began to question our involvement in Vietnam. We pointed to evidence, flimsy as it was, that the President was part of a conspiracy regarding the break in at the Watergate. And yes, we were "kooks", we were "conspiracy theorists". But we were right....
See https://www.metabunk.org/threads/why-are-people-called-conspiracy-theorists.2809/
for further discussion.
 

Quantumbeliever

Banned
Banned
In decreasing order of probability:
  1. They heard a signal, but it was not the black box
  2. They did not heard a signal, and the summary is a mistake
  3. They heard a signal, but the black box was never found
  4. They heard a signal, found the black box, but someone decided later it would be better to pretend they had no
Given the vast amount of equipment, at the site and nearby, it's most likely just to be a false signal.
The airwaves are full of stray emissions. As a licensed ham you should be aware of RFI.

You're suggestion that only cockpit voice recorders ever transmit at 37.5 kHz is simply not realistic. Poorly designed, unfiltered, or defective radio equipment can cause harmonic interference and splatter.
I didn't suggest that. You did. What I said was that the frequencies assigned to the box (in actuality the beacon) would not be frequencies generally used in the equipment found at site. As far as "evidence" pertaining to FCC bandwidth assignment of radio frequencies, you can easily find that information. It's a non-issue as the beacons "ping" at a rate of once per second. A trained investigator is unlikely to tell the Governor of New York, "We have located the black box" unless he had tuned to the specific beacon frequency (37.5 kHz) AND heard the "one ping per second" signature. Of course on any radio band there is likely to be interference, however, the men assigned the task to locate the black boxes are specifically trained to discern the unique, one per second ping from an airline beacon from other noise. Is it possible that another electronic source near the site was somehow transmitting on the same frequency, provided the same electronic and acoustic signature as the beacon AND transmitted a ping at exactly one second intervals? Yes. It's possible. It's also possible that the men sent to do this job after the most heinous attack in our history were amateurs or just mistaken. We each have to decide the most plausible explanation based on the facts as best we know them. I think they found it based on what I have said. You may disagree. That doesn't make either of us "right" or "wrong". Just means we disagree.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I didn't suggest that. You did. What I said was that the frequencies assigned to the box (in actuality the beacon) would not be frequencies generally used in the equipment found at site. As far as "evidence" pertaining to FCC bandwidth assignment of radio frequencies, you can easily find that information. It's a non-issue as the beacons "ping" at a rate of once per second. A trained investigator is unlikely to tell the Governor of New York, "We have located the black box" unless he had tuned to the specific beacon frequency (37.5 kHz) AND heard the "one ping per second" signature. Of course on any radio band there is likely to be interference, however, the men assigned the task to locate the black boxes are specifically trained to discern the unique, one per second ping from an airline beacon from other noise.
Again though 37.5 kHz is not a radio frequency. It's audio, an ultrasonic ping.

And you have no idea how much "training" was involved here. People make mistakes all the time. Mistakes get announced in press releases all the time.
 

Trigger Hippie

Senior Member.
OK, so after a little more digging...

Sept 18
An executive summary to the governor states that a black box has been identified.

Sept 19
FEMA situation report #15 states that on Sept 19, a ten-man CECOM team is using acoustic sensors and direction finders to locate the audio transmitters (pingers) on the recorders.
Sept 24
New York City Mayor's OEM/Emergency Operations Center Situation Report #27 states "Unable to detect any "pinging" from either black box."
What are we supposed to conclude from this?

As an aside, it looks like they attempt to locate these black boxes by their acoustic ping. Strange.
 
Last edited:

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
As an aside, it looks like they attempt to locate these black boxes by their acoustic ping. Strange.
If they are buried, then maybe that's got a far better chance of being detected than radio. The rubble would partially transmit acoustic, but just attenuate (block) radio.
 

MikeC

Closed Account
I thought the locator beacons on black boxes were for underwater use only - the ones I recall fitting had battery terminals slightly separated - water would bridge the gap and complete the circuit, thus activating the signal.

You can see this clearly on the unit photographed in this article - the beacon is "clipped" onto it on the right hand side - the outer circumference of the locator and the center of the end are separated by a cream colored section.

Same with the photos on the wiki page - and indeed in the article on underwater locator beacons.

so the beacon simply would not go off at all in a land crash unless it ended up in a puddle/lake/river/broken fire main/etc.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Some locator beacons appear to have inertia switches.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distress_radiobeacon
 

MikeC

Closed Account
Yes indeed - those are common on aircraft - mandatory in most cases (here for example they are mandatory unless a single seat a/c, or a 2 seater that stays within 10 nm of it's departure point, and for microlights personal beacons can be substituted) - but they are not the locator beacons for the FDR and CVR - they are for the aircraft as a whole.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Yes indeed - those are common on aircraft - mandatory in most cases (here for example they are mandatory unless a single seat a/c, or a 2 seater that stays within 10 nm of it's departure point, and for microlights personal beacons can be substituted) - but they are not the locator beacons for the FDR and CVR - they are for the aircraft as a whole.
I guess we'd have to see the spec for the actual boxes in question to be sure.
 

MikeC

Closed Account
The skybrary article on FDR's mentions an inbuilt ELT as well as a ULB for "most modern FDR's".

If we know the part numbers of the boxes in Flights 11 and 175 then we might be able to determine if they were modern enough to have an ELT as well as a ULB - I haven't found that information yet.
 

Bruno D.

Senior Member.
Concerning the landing gear you mentioned; you failed to mention that it was found wedged between buildings with a piece of rope tied around it, just as if it were "planted". The best explanation officials have for the rope is that someone must have found it earlier, tried to remove it, forgot to tell anyone. LMAO. Completely as absurd as the passport. Impossible? No. Unlikely? Yes.
Let me understand your point: "they" were able to plan it without anyone noticing any suspicious movement being fantastically competent by forgot to untie the rope? Just like that?

I think you need to make up your mind. They are either tremendously competent or not.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
The rope was discussed in this thread on the "landing gear" (actually a flap mechanism)

Update on the rope

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/04/29/us/new-york-9-11-plane-part/index.html?hpt=hp_t3

 

Hama Neggs

Senior Member.
Let me say first that I think the whole "conspiracy" term has been bandied about way too much. The word now immediately conjures negative connotations. A citizen should be able to question their government without instantly being labeled a "kook". We, on this site, should be able to engage in fact driven argument without labels and stereotypes. I joined this site because I am interested in a variety of issues and enjoy exploring various explanations for historical and current events and in general the discussions here seemed reasoned and respectful. In the late 60s and 70s many people, myself included began to question our involvement in Vietnam. We pointed to evidence, flimsy as it was, that the President was part of a conspiracy regarding the break in at the Watergate. And yes, we were "kooks", we were "conspiracy theorists". But we were right. So before we write off an explanation for an event that runs counter to the "official story", let's look at history which has shown time and time again that the official story is often incorrect. For the record, I do not embrace the proposition that 911 was a false flag nor do I accept the official story, which has already been conclusively shown to be inaccurate. There is no disagreement that at least some of the statements made by GWB and/or others in his administration were false. There is strong evidence to suggest that a cover up of some sort occurred. Able-Danger conclusively proves that the intelligence community had prior knowledge of the hijackers, a claim denied by the Bush admin. Now, we know politicians will cover their butts. Right now we don't know if they were covering incompetence or something more nefarious, but there is NO questions they were covering SOMETHING. Which begs the question, "What were they hiding!" The question remains open but there is a lot of material concerning the Bushes, the Saudis, and the intelligence communities as well as trillions of dollars "missing" from the Pentagons budget.
Anyway, as to the rope; I think the question "Why would you need a rope to lower it down" is self evident. I'm not saying the rope in anyway says, "conspiracy!" What I'm saying is that in any crime scene, all evidence pertaining to the crime and found at the site must be explained as best as possible. The onus to explain the rope is not on us, the citizenry, it is on the professional investigators. I make no inference other than to say that the official explanation seems far fetched. Period. If you want to draw some other conclusion, feel free. I just think it's really odd that if someone had found the piece earlier and tried to retrieve it, that they didn't tell anyone. After all this was a HUGE piece of wreckage wedged between two buildings. Wouldn't you at least let the buildings owner know?
You use the phrase "...just as if it were "planted"" and expect the reader NOT to infer a conspiracy?
 

SRXpert

New Member
I have noticed, Mick, that you have not answered Anna Layloria's claims. If you look at the video she posted, she DID give a timestamp. and what specific rule did she break in order to get banned?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I have noticed, Mick, that you have not answered Anna Layloria's claims. If you look at the video she posted, she DID give a timestamp. and what specific rule did she break in order to get banned?
What claim exactly?
 

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
Those claims aren't the topic of the thread.

They may have been banned for being a sock puppet of a previously banned poster, but I could be wrong.
If someone consistently goes off-topic and refuse to address on-topic points they can be banned - some people just aren't interested in honest dialogue but in promoting a view at all costs.

Disagreement can be fine but some conversations just aren't productive at all and as soon as one point is disproved some posters will just jump straight to another without acknowledging the first one is wrong. That can get you banned eventually.
 

SRXpert

New Member
Those claims aren't the topic of the thread.

They may have been banned for being a sock puppet of a previously banned poster, but I could be wrong.
If someone consistently goes off-topic and refuse to address on-topic points they can be banned - some people just aren't interested in honest dialogue but in promoting a view at all costs.

Disagreement can be fine but some conversations just aren't productive at all and as soon as one point is disproved some posters will just jump straight to another without acknowledging the first one is wrong. That can get you banned eventually.
This thread tries to say the black boxes were recored right? In the time anna gave you in that video Charles Strange says why they weren't recovered.
 

SRXpert

New Member
The flight 77 and 93 black boxes were recovered. The WTC black boxes were not.
Ah forgive me. the video was talking about something complety different. Something about an extortion 17 or whatever that is.

I guess timestamps can be used to take stuff out of context.
 

WeedWhacker

Senior Member
The flight 77 and 93 black boxes were recovered. The WTC black boxes were not.
Correct. Furthermore, a point of clarity RE: American 77...the CVR (Cockpit Voice Recorder) was recovered, but was severely damaged and unreadable and hence gave no useable info.
 

Whitebeard

Senior Member.
Just a thought...

Who was actually looking for the black boxes, or what was left of them?

I mean in a 'regular plane crash' as far as I can ascertain the standard procedure is that as soon as the emergency services have confirmed all survivors are out, the site is sealed and the investigators move in. They comb the entire wreckage recording everything as it has come to rest, and then they remove the black boxes for analysis before clearing the rest of the debris away for more investigation. Now these investigators, are trained experts from the CAA, NTSB or whatever body is undertaking the investigation (they can be teams made up from more than one authority on occasions.) These guys know what they are looking for, to their trained eye a lump of mangled flap actuator looks different from a lump of seat frame, and a black box looks different from a box of electronics from the radar etc. so most black boxes are found. (I'm sure some of the aviation industry types here will be able to fill in exactly the procedure and training of these investigators better than me)

Now look at the exception circumstances surrounding the WTC impacts. The black boxes in those planes are going to be slammed into steel and concrete structures, braised in fires for a couple of hours, dropped 60-70 floors with the weight of another 30+ floors landing on top of them, then, subject to more fires for a few days afterwards. All of which would have subjected them to stresses far beyond any design limits, and more than likely smashed them to bits. Then we get to the real crux of my point. This was not a site that was sealed off and handed over to aircrash investigators, it was a massive chaos of a disaster area, crawling with rescue workers who had more important things to do, ie look for survivors, than search for four small boxes, that may or may not be intact, in a pile of rubble that weighed nearly 1 million tons, was around 60ft high, covered a vast ground area and extend underground into 60ft of basement area (stats from here)

Then by the time the emergency services switched from a rescue mission to a recovery one it would be too late to send the aircrash investigators in, the site had been too disturbed (if it hadn't been already a futile task after the extreme events that had happened). So the debris was cleared, not by aircrash experts who knew exactly what they were looking for, but contractors with little or no experience of aircrashes at all. Now I couldn't tell a fragment of a mangled CVR or FDR from any other lump of wreckage from two aircraft, three tall building and lord knows how many vehicles, can anyone here, without professional aviation experience honestly say they could? could those here WITH professional aviation experience really do any better in those extreme circumstances? I doubt it. So therefore its pretty safe to say that the remains of those boxes were just swept up with the rest of the 'junk' and carted away.

They, or bits of them may still turn up on Staten Island, as far as I am aware the rubble is still being picked over. But I'm not holding my breath.
 
Last edited:

WeedWhacker

Senior Member
Basically.....in other sorts of crashes within U.S. jurisdiction, the NTSB take over. Events of 9/11 were a "crime scene" initially, with many jurisdictional "arm wrestling" in play, mainly FBI.

Of course, at the Pentagon and Shanksville, PA, the emphatic desire to recover the Flight Recorders had to have been communicated, by aviation expert investigators (NTSB) TO the appropriate criminal investigative authorities/agencies.

In the case of the WTC Towers 1 & 2? I recall (on that day) thinking that those four Recorders would yield answers....only later, once I realized the sheer MASS of destruction, in the collapses of those two buildings, did it become clear to me that those boxes were simply pulverized in the process.

EDIT: Keep in mind that at the energies involved, the so-called "Black Boxes" were not "indestructible". They are designed to withstand a certain amount of force, certainly. But NOT those forces that they were subjected to, that day, in all cases.
 

Oystein

Senior Member
Some aircraft parts were recovered in NYC in recognizable shape - probably most, if not all, of them escaped from the towers during the crash. So that's a a first indication that it's not unrealistic to hope for recorder survival.
Recorders are designed to withstand crashes, so it wouldn't be surprising if they survived the crash sufficiently intact to contain readable data. But they would already have been taken to their limits by these high-speed crashes into hard objects. Certainly be deformed. But I am certain that other recorders have survived other crashes that were as severe, or even worse. Say, into mountainsides.
Recorders are also designed to withstand some fire - but I guess being involved in such office building fires quickly goes beyond the specs, especially with such a severe impact before.
So by the time the deformed recorders have endured severe fires, it's probably a toss-up at best whether they are still of any use - see Pentagon, where FDR was okay, voice recorder was not.
THEN comes the building collapse, which buries the remains of the recorders under 15 to 33 stories worth of debris, which drop onto them with the speed of fast trains. At this point, the cases will give way and cease to protect the electronic content. This includes the signal beacons. So there is no way now to locate them by means other than plainly seeing them.
And then you need to wait weeks rather than days before clean-up and rescue crews have removed the 15 to 33 floors of debris above the recorder remains. The unprotected content as well as the now useless shell were subject to smoldering fires and all sorts of other noxious environmental influences - corrosive stuff and what have you. The shells are painted bright orange, and that paint probably is of the sturdier kind, but every paint has a temperature beyond which it simply ceaes to be paint - either the binder disintegrates and goes away, or the pigment reacts in some way and loses is color. Badly deformed, void of color, and with content destroyed, no one will recognize these pieces of warped scrap metal. And even if they did...
 

WeedWhacker

Senior Member
Some aircraft parts were recovered in NYC in recognizable shape - probably most, if not all, of them escaped from the towers during the crash. So that's a a first indication that it's not unrealistic to hope for recorder survival.
Yes....this is a basic aspect of the physics involved.

The FDR and CVR are installed in the most rear of the airplane....(Concept is, they will "survive" the crash sequence, IN that location)

Of course, NONE of the "designers" of these Recorders envisioned a "9/11" type of crash event. They just weren't built to withstand this level of destruction.
 

jaydeehess

Senior Member.
Yes....this is a basic aspect of the physics involved.

The FDR and CVR are installed in the most rear of the airplane....(Concept is, they will "survive" the crash sequence, IN that location)

Of course, NONE of the "designers" of these Recorders envisioned a "9/11" type of crash event. They just weren't built to withstand this level of destruction.
I shake my head whenever I see someone railing on about them not finding the "indestructible black boxes".
 

Bruno D.

Senior Member.
I shake my head whenever I see someone railing on about them not finding the "indestructible black boxes".
They planted so many things ... wouldn't it be easier, MUCH easier, to simply plant fake "indestructible black boxes" corroborating everything about the flight than disappearing them?

As I always say, these conspirators have the capability of being really really smart and really really dumb at the same time.
 

jaydeehess

Senior Member.
They planted so many things ... wouldn't it be easier, MUCH easier, to simply plant fake "indestructible black boxes" corroborating everything about the flight than disappearing them?

As I always say, these conspirators have the capability of being really really smart and really really dumb at the same time.
The particularly odd bit ascribed to the moronic geniuses who planned and orchestrated the 911 attacks concerns flight 77 which hit the Pentagon. Supposedly the DFDR illustrates a vastly different flight path than that observed both by eye witnesses and demonstrated by the downed lamp posts.
We then have, supposedly, a faked DFDR and "agents/spooks" running about planting not only the fake flight recorder, with the wrong information on it, but also downing lamp posts, all without being seen doing so by anyone at all. Nor, of course, was there a possibility to plant a fake cockpit voice recorder for flight 77 even though, supposedly, the CVR for flight 93 ( crashed in a field in Pennsylvania) was faked and planted at that site.
 

cjnewson88

Member
Something I've always enjoyed asking no planers jay, and it stumps them every time. As far as the FDR from AAL77 however some truthers got together and decoded the last 4 seconds of it, which shows it actually hit the Pentagon. Needless to say mrs bobby over at P4T threw it out and firmly plugged fingers in ears.

Back to the towers, its pretty much a no brainer than if the black boxers were not lucky enough to escape the building with in initial impact, then their fate is very bleak when 450 million kilograms of buildings crush you. We do know however that at least the ELT on AAL11 when off on impact, as reported by pilots to New York ARTCC. (edit: you can hear the report here at the 31 min mark)
 
Last edited:

jaydeehess

Senior Member.
It was Warren Stutt that decoded data from the last few seconds of 77's dfdr. He is not a truther. Yes, it does illustrate a flightpath into and impact with the Pentagon.

http://warrenstutt.com/
Yes, when he posted his work on Pilots for 911 Truth, Balsamo made sure it was only in the special subforum for debunkers and refuses to acknowledge that it debunks PFT and CiT contentions.
 

Oystein

Senior Member
It was Warren Stutt that decoded data from the last few seconds of 77's dfdr. He is not a truther. ...
Warren had a paper together with truther Frank Legge in Jones's truther-"journal", perhaps he was therefore mistaken as a truther (or perhaps he was a truther at some point?).
 

cjnewson88

Member
My mistake, as Oystein pointed out I assumed he was a truther because his paper was written with Frank Legge and is hosted by the Jones journal of woo.
 

econ41

Senior Member
Two points I think should be of interest:

1) Remember that the binary black or white "truthers" v "debunkers" is a relatively new phenomenon. In my experience from 2006 up 'til about 2010 there were many genuine truthers and sceptics - the "either with us or agin us" is the current and last few years. e.g. a lot of the good work published on 911Forum involved persons who would today be damned as truthers and therefore automatically wrong - even if they were to claim "the cloudless daytime sky is blue"

2) A lot of discussion about FD and CV recorders forgets that the objective of most aircraft crash investigations is to determine cause of crash. That was not the primary purpose for 3 out of 4 of the 9/11 crashes. Arguably not so for the fourth. So arguments that assume primacy of "determine cause of crash" are dubious. It is analogous to the demands for chemical testing for explosives in the WTC collapses. Chemical testing confirms other evidence of explosive use or use of accelerants when the objective is to prove (say) arson or other malicious human intervention (AKA "CD"). Chemical is neither the primary evidence nor the relevant test when there is no plausible argument for incendiary or MHI.
 
Last edited:

Hevach

Senior Member.
On point 1, genuine skeptics ask questions, but what sets them apart from conspiracy theorists is that they also accept answers and don't create their own. So, over time, their questions were answered and they ceased to be skeptical about it. While there are still mysteries left, most either accepted that what we don't know is esoteric minutia and not necessary to a functional understanding of the events or that they'll probably never be answered anyway, or at the very least saw that spinning fantastical fictions that reject the known answers is not a conducive way to answering those remaining questions.

There were a great many of them in 2002-2003, but their numbers have declined, and for a while there it down to the "freshman effect" - teenagers too young to remember or understand the events when they happened discovering the questions before the answers and think they've discovered something new and profound.

That's the thing about genuine skeptics: If there are genuine answers, they don't remain skeptical. Eventually all that's left is... Well, what 9/11 truth is now. With smaller events like Sandy Hook or the Sydney attack, that usually happens pretty quickly - often as soon as a perpetrator is in custody or when the reports are published. 9/11 was big enough and destructive enough and clouded in enough government flailing overreaction and complicated for a while by patriotic blindness to draw the process out, but it's still largely run its course.
 

Monty Lovering

New Member
What I find kinda cute is the completely failure of the CT to look at the reverse angle.

Why not arrange for black boxes with data and voice recordings that match the desired scenario to be recovered? Easy to do.
 

jaydeehess

Senior Member.
What I find kinda cute is the completely failure of the CT to look at the reverse angle.

Why not arrange for black boxes with data and voice recordings that match the desired scenario to be recovered? Easy to do.
Apparently the Government/Illuminati/NWO/Yoos employ people I like to , oxymoronically, refer to as "incompetent geniuses". Capable of planning and arranging for a vast, complicated, complex, hugely expensive, and utterly secret plot while at the same time incapable of some very simple and inexpensive details such as faking flight data recorders properly.
 

Monty Lovering

New Member
Apparently the Government/Illuminati/NWO/Yoos employ people I like to , oxymoronically, refer to as "incompetent geniuses". Capable of planning and arranging for a vast, complicated, complex, hugely expensive, and utterly secret plot while at the same time incapable of some very simple and inexpensive details such as faking flight data recorders properly.
That would be it. Incompetent geniuses. At least that's one magnitude of competence above 'politician'.
 
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
Mick West Debunked: MH370: Daily Mail claims new sonar images indicate aircraft debris Flight MH370 3
Rico Debunked: Dane Wigington's Undeniable Footage of Jet Aircraft Spraying [Aerodynamic Contrails] Contrails and Chemtrails 42
TWCobra Max Bliss debunked-Aircraft engine oil systems used to dispense Chemtrail chemicals Contrails and Chemtrails 0
TWCobra Wigington/Max Bliss Debunked. Automated Chemtrail dispersal Commercial aircraft Contrails and Chemtrails 7
Mick West Debunked: Pentagon has Evidence of "Off-World Vehicles Not Made on this Earth" UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 14
derrick06 Debunked: United Nations creates a "NWO" website Conspiracy Theories 2
N Debunked: Google Mail icon shows linkage to Freemasons Conspiracy Theories 4
Mendel Debunked: The WHO did not take the Taiwan CDC seriously Coronavirus COVID-19 0
A Why 9/11 Truthers Are Wrong About The Facts | (Part 1 w/ Mick West) 9/11 1
Mendel Debunked: Radar Waves Affect Clouds General Discussion 0
Pumpernickel Need Debunking: Foucault's Pendulum debunked through Mach's principle (the Earth is a static object in the center of the Universe) Science and Pseudoscience 16
M Ufos arrive to the central zone of Chile. (Debunked). Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 0
Jesse3959 FE Debunked with water tube level - 187 foot building 21.2 miles away below eye level Flat Earth 0
H Debunked: Cadillac Mountain from 220 miles Flat Earth 7
Jesse3959 FE Claim Debunked: JTolan Epic Gravity Experiment - Flat earther disproves Perspective! (or his instruments.) Flat Earth 0
Mick West Debunked: DoD prepares for martial law in CONUS: Conspiracy Theories 0
Oystein Debunked: AE911T: CNBC Anchor Ron Insana claims Building 7 a Controlled Implosion 9/11 13
A Debunked: NASA tampered with the original television audio of the Apollo 11 moon landing Conspiracy Theories 1
Greylandra Debunked: media headline "Judea declares war on Germany" [boycott] Conspiracy Theories 20
Mick West Discovery Channel's "Contact: Declassified Breakthrough" was debunked 2.5 years ago UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 8
Joe Hill Debunked: "The North Face of Building 7 Was Pulled Inward" 9/11 66
A Debunked : Fake Set Moon Landing with TV Camera and Stairs Conspiracy Theories 3
Mick West Debunked: Photo with Sun Rays at Odd Angles Flat Earth 0
Staffan Debunked: Wikileaks releases unused footage of moon landing (Capricorn One movie scenes) Conspiracy Theories 2
Mick West Debunked: Neil deGrasse Tyson : "That Stuff is Flat" Flat Earth 10
Mendel Debunked: Air Map of the World 1945 is a flat Earth map Flat Earth 0
Trailblazer Debunked: Trees being cut down "because they block 5G" (tree replacement in Belgium) 5G and Other EMF Health Concerns 44
deirdre Debunked: Exemption from military service doc proves Jews had foreknowledge of WW2 (fake leaflet) General Discussion 0
Trailblazer Debunked: Obama called Michelle "Michael" in a speech. (Referring to Michael Mullen Jr) Quotes Debunked 0
Rory Debunked: 120-mile shot of San Jacinto proves flat earth Flat Earth 39
Rory Debunked: The Lunar Cycle affects birth rates Health and Quackery 26
Rory Debunked: Study shows link between menstrual cycle and the moon Health and Quackery 30
novatron Debunked: California Wildfires Match the Exactly Path of the Proposed Rail System Wildfires 3
Rory Debunked: "You must love yourself before you love another" - fake Buddha quote Quotes Debunked 7
W Debunked: Qanon claims there have been 51k sealed indictments filed this year. Current Events 11
K Debunked: Audio of David Rockefeller "leaked" speech in 1991 [Audio Simulation] General Discussion 2
tadaaa Debunked: Fake photos-Novichok attack Russian 'agents' (side by side gates) General Discussion 34
Mick West Debunked: XYO Device Replacing GPS, Saving $2 Million a Day General Discussion 23
Mick West Debunked: "Tip Top" as a QAnon Clue from Trump [He's said it before] Conspiracy Theories 3
Whitebeard Debunked: Nibiru FOUND? Mysterious gigantic rogue planet spotted lurking outside our solar system Science and Pseudoscience 1
Mick West Debunked: "There Exists a Shadowy Government" — Daniel Inouye Quotes Debunked 0
Mick West Debunked: Delta Lambda Compression General Discussion 16
MisterB Debunked: Isle of Man from Blackpool at water level proves flat earth [refraction] Flat Earth 19
JFDee Debunked: Wernher von Braun confirmed that rockets can't leave earth Conspiracy Theories 23
Mick West Debunked: Missing $21 Trillion / $6.5 Trillion / $2.3 Trillion - Journal Vouchers Conspiracy Theories 33
MikeG Debunked: Obamacare Article 54 (Satire FB Page) General Discussion 2
Mick West Debunked: "Deadly Ultraviolet UV-C and UV-B Penetration to Earth’s Surface:" [Stray Light] Contrails and Chemtrails 30
Astro Debunked: Apollo Lunar Module Hatch Too Small for Spacesuit Science and Pseudoscience 0
Mick West Debunked: NIST's Lack of Explanation for WTC7 Freefall [They Have One - Column Buckling] 9/11 38
Jedo Debunked: WTC7 was the only building not on the WTC block that had a fire on 9/11 9/11 0
Related Articles


















































Related Articles

Top