Thread: Flight 93's "inconsistencies"

Originally Posted by RtWngaFraud

The phone call angle is somewhat complex, but, in short....voice morphing. It's a technology that's alive and real today as it was then as well. Google it.

Voice morphing doesn't cut it. You can make someone sound like someone else, but you lose the mannerisms and idiosyncracies two people have. Everyone talks differently. But hey. Don't take my word for it. Take the word of the guy who came up with voice morphing technology:

Source article

Dear Mr. Wieck,

Following please find an amended version of my commenary on Voice Morphing and the alleged 911 conspiracy. You may post it with attribution, cleaning up the html as needed.

Sincerely,
George Papcun, Ph.D.


Purveyors of conspiracy theories have claimed that the events of 9/11 were the result of a massive government plot and cover-up. (See, for example, www.loosechange911.com) According to their version of events, there were no hijackers. Instead, the World Trade Center buildings were blown up by explosives planted inside the buildings rather than, or at least in addition to, the effects of the passenger airplanes crashing into them. They claim that the government (or the CIA or someone other than Osama bin Laden and the hijackers) was behind 9/11.

However, a major problem for their allegation, given that they claim there were no hijackers, is that the passengers on United Flight 93 that crashed in Pennsylvania called home with desperate messages to loved ones, in which they said there were hijackers. Accordingly, the conspiracy theory purveyors have needed to claim that someone (namely, me) created the voices of the passengers in those phone calls. That allegation is plainly outrageous and demeaning to the memories of those courageous passengers.

I originally developed the technology of voice morphing, the technology by which it is possible to make someone seem to say something they did not say (see http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv...rkin020199.htm ) and coined the phrase. Therefore, I know what would have been required to create such bogus calls. Practical considerations preclude making counterfeit telephone calls in this situation. For example, it is necessary to have samples of the voices of the people to be imitated. In situations like this, where the goal is to participate in an unconstrained conversation, the voice sample must be extensive. I cannot imagine how I might have obtained extensive samples of the voices of the passengers on Flight 93, especially not knowing which of them would call home. Additionally, in this situation it would be necessary to know what someone would say to his or her loved ones under such circumstances. What pet names would be used? What references would be made to children and other loved ones? Do believers actually suppose that the government (or I) listens in to everyone’s pillow talk? In a separate essay, I will cover the technical aspects of voice morphing, which will further demonstrate the implausibility of the scenario set forth by the purveyors of conspiracy theories.

Whether such wild-eyed theories are worth being concerned about is problematic. However, in their own words, their conspiracy theory organization “has grown from a cult following to a grassroots organism that can no longer be contained” (op cit). I have received email from a high school social studies teacher who told me that her students actually believe that I did everything the purveyors of conspiracy theories say I did. Why they would so mistrust their government and be so naïve with regard to technical issues are interesting questions, albeit matters well beyond the scope of this essay.

Originally Posted by Patriot911

Voice morphing doesn't cut it. You can make someone sound like someone else, but you lose the mannerisms and idiosyncracies two people have. Everyone talks differently. But hey. Don't take my word for it. Take the word of the guy who came up with voice morphing technology:

Source article

Voice morphing does "cut it", very easily.

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com...howentry=24549

Educate yourself.

Originally Posted by RtWngaFraud

Voice morphing does "cut it", very easily.

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com...howentry=24549

Educate yourself.

So do we believe David Ray (Theologian and seller of an agenda) or do we believe George Papcun, Ph.D (the guy who invented the technology)?

Educate yourself indeed.

Originally Posted by RtWngaFraud

Voice morphing does "cut it", very easily.

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com...howentry=24549

Educate yourself.

Actually, it doesn't.

And more lies and distortions from Griffen's book doesn't cut it either.

Only 2 calls were made from cell phones when the plane was at around 5,000 feet.
https://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/flight93page1

Voice morphing does "cut it", very easily.

You said that the crash site was prepared after the fact because the plane was shot down with a missile, and that this was not part of the original plan.

This premise conflicts with the idea that voice morphing technology was used because this technology requires preparation. Voice samples are required. Speech patterns are required.

In order to use this technology they would have had to:

Know who would be on the plane.
Sample the person's voice and speech habits without the person's knowledge.
Know who that person would call.
Develop a free flow script that could anticipate what the two participants would talk about.

This does not happen in real time.

So you should probably pick one or the other.

Either:

1. The plane didn't exist, and the whole situation was planned and determined before hand.

or

2. The plane did exist, something went wrong, and the plan had to be changed by shooting it down with a missile.

Either way, there's a lot of loose ends in your description of events that don't make a whole lot of sense.

Voice morphing does "cut it", very easily.

You said that the crash site was prepared after the fact because the plane was shot down with a missile, and that this was not part of the original plan.

This premise conflicts with the idea that voice morphing technology was used because this technology requires preparation. Voice samples are required. Speech patterns are required.

In order to use this technology they would have had to:

Know who would be on the plane.
Sample the person's voice and speech habits without the person's knowledge.
Know who that person would call.
Develop a free flow script that could anticipate what the two participants would talk about.

This does not happen in real time.

So you should probably pick one or the other.

Either:

1. The plane didn't exist, and the whole situation was planned and determined before hand.

or

2. The plane did exist, something went wrong, and the plan had to be changed by shooting it down with a missile.

Either way, there's a lot of loose ends in your description of events that don't make a whole lot of sense.

Originally Posted by Fangbeer

Either way, there's a lot of loose ends in your description of events that don't make a whole lot of sense.

This has my vote for understatement of the century.

Originally Posted by Patriot911

This has my vote for understatement of the century.

Can I get a "yay team!"?

Originally Posted by RtWngaFraud

Can I get a "yay team!"?

Can we get more than trolling post replies from you? You make claims in your posts, then your posts whine that nobody responds point for point when several people have replied point for point, then your posts only contain trolling responses like above. Your posts are getting very predictable.

All three debris sites are consistant with a crash and explosion due to controlled flight into terrain. The impact crater is the right size and shape for being made by an inverted aircraft coming in nose-down at a relatively sharp angle. The angle of the imprint made by the vertical stabilizer indicates that the tail had separated at least partially,leaving the rear of the fuselage open at the time that the fuel exploded, so that light debris such as papers and ID cards and light items of clothing would be launched into the air. This would account for one of the debris fields up-range of the crash site.

Since the plane was still in a roll when it hit the ground, it is not unexpected that one engine might break loose while the other got buried. That it bounced is no surprise. Watch someone skimming stones across a pond some time. That involves a lot less momentum in relation to weight.

All the heavy debris was found down-range of the impact point, exactly as one shoud expect.

There is nothing the least bit strange about the debris fields or the crater, given the described sequence of events.

Given the vegetation surrounding the crater, there is no way that the crater could have been made by other means, such as heavy excavating equipment (which would leave tire tracks in the vegetation) or hand excavating (feet would trample the vegetation) nor explosives (which would neccessarily spread fresh dirt and gravel back up-range and to the sides.) The dirt is pushed up on the down-range side and there is fresh dirt and gravel down-range. There was no vegetation inside the crater, so it could not have been made a long enough time ahead so that the vegetation would grow back to cover tire or feet tracks.

The bandana would probably have come off during a struggle with the passengers who tried to re-take the aircraft. The aircraft would have to be very finely shredded in order to damage it in that case. That is just the sort of thing that one finds at a crash site where the aircraft is not consumed in a fire.

(Just my professional opinion as a former military fire fighter with some college-level training in arson investigations.)