Search for '9/11 human remains' to resume in NY

[Heiwa]

There is also this dentist Jeffrey R Burkes, with clinic at East 56th Street, NY, that identified 600 WTC vicsims by checking their teeth - http://letsrollforums.com/dentist-ident ... 2&posted=1 and http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/01/nyreg ... html?_r=2&. Imagine that! 600 corpses and Jeffrey checked their teeth. And then he had an affair with a living patient requesting PAINKILLERS.

[edgewaters]

Ok, they find a strand of hair or a tooth and they say "Oh that's Joe Bloggs!" How the fuck do they know it's Joe Bloggs? Did Joe Bloggs previously and in foresight of his own demise submit himself for DNA profiling? Or did someone come to his house and take away his hairbrush and his underpants after the event of his death? Or did they have a sample of his blood on record? Did they have a sample of living tissue? I'm not sure about the whole DNA thing at all, could it be a hoax in itself?

What I think is that if you were to dig in any given area in New York, as deep as the sub-basements of the WTC, you're likely to find teeth, bones, maybe even hair (but most of all, teeth) from tons of people. Mostly from the 1800s. Any given person from that era will likely have thousands of living relatives today, many in New York but some all across the US (and possibly abroad too). So, with enough samples of sufficient age, it would not be difficult to match up to whomever you wanted to.

[brianv]

Ok, they find a strand of hair or a tooth and they say "Oh that's Joe Bloggs!" How the fuck do they know it's Joe Bloggs? Did Joe Bloggs previously and in foresight of his own demise submit himself for DNA profiling? Or did someone come to his house and take away his hairbrush and his underpants after the event of his death? Or did they have a sample of his blood on record? Did they have a sample of living tissue? I'm not sure about the whole DNA thing at all, could it be a hoax in itself?

What I think is that if you were to dig in any given area in New York, as deep as the sub-basements of the WTC, you're likely to find teeth, bones, maybe even hair (but most of all, teeth) from tons of people. Mostly from the 1800s. Any given person from that era will likely have thousands of living relatives today, many in New York but some all across the US (and possibly abroad too). So, with enough samples of sufficient age, it would not be difficult to match up to whomever you wanted to.

Crimes where DNA is used as evidence : "There is a 100,000,000:1 chance that it belongs to the accused."

I'm afraid you are talking crap! You go out and dig up some bones and have it DNA tested then try finding the relatives of the bone.

[fbenario]

My post, and my curiosity, was not intended to direct readers attention to the fact there were real victims.

I wholeheartedly believe that the great majority and of the alleged victims were total fabricated simulated non-entities.

I am equally certain that a few vics that were once living breathing people did not die as purported ; there were no planes, no crashes, and either none at all, or at most a small handful of people in the towers when they imploded.

I believe that that investigating the "reported" facts may help to determine the modus operandi of the whole scheme.
Since my background is in data analytics, I thought it may be interesting to look deeper into the false claims to see if there is a pattern.

For example we may discover that 99% of the airplane vicsims were said to have been identified by dna , but only 10% of the tower vicsims to have been identified through that method. What were the comparable numbers of "dna" identified vicsims for Pentagon employees vicsims versus those to have allegedly been on the non-existant flight 77?. How many, of the alleged vics were claimed to have beenidentified by body parts or boine fragments. (those may be a clue to which subset of the vicsims were "created" by using body parts from corpses taken from the morgue)

I think you are a touch paranoid, Hoi, if you feel that my purpose here is to "speculate against the evidence for fakery".
What drew me here in the first place was that it was at the time the only site that openly discussed the fact that what was shown on TV on 911 was nothing other than video fakery. You need not feel insecure that your vicsim report is being challenged, at least not by me. I think it is an amazing piece of research and I am a huge believer in the fact that were tons of fabricated vicsims that never existed prior to the event. My feeling that there were possibly a few "real" people who were either killed , or are now hiding under a different identity does not jeopardize the value of your research nor does it make me a "troll" trying to cast aspersions on the entire body of research.

This thread is titled "search for 911 remains" . my query was in response to the data that Heiwa posted regarding the numbers of vicsims identified and not identified. When perps commit a crime the clues they leave behind are often found in what they have done to try and "cover up" for their crime. In this case , what have they done to cover up for the lack of real victims?

They have obviously planted phony and/or fabricated evidence. I was wondering if anyone had more detailed information about the phony evidence that could be analyzed for patterns. That's all.

regards,

Steve O.

Word salad. This wastes everyone's time, please stop posting such silliness. Sounding "oh-so-serious-and-trustworthy" renders everything you say suspicious.

[edgewaters]

Crimes where DNA is used as evidence : "There is a 100,000,000:1 chance that it belongs to the accused."

You're talking about a match to a specific individual - not to anyone he might be related to. It's completely different. I doubt very much that they have samples from the actual victims, I bet they just have samples from the supposed victim's family, and all they have to do is find a related person who shares some common DNA.

Unless you believe they've got a toothbrush or whatever from every single victim, to do an exact match with. I kind of doubt that, given that the victims are imaginary.

You go out and dig up some bones and have it DNA tested then try finding the relatives of the bone.

They do that. Look up "Cheddar Man" for an example. Some Neolithic tribesman they dig up and in the nearby village they find a few dozens of relatives. Surprising? Not really, if you understand that the billions of humans on the planet today all come from just a few millions back then, and there's been thousands of years of interbreeding in between where all the genetic material is getting swapped around. Even if we just cloned ourselves he'd probably still have 1 or 2 relatives nearby, never mind sexual reproduction.

One person from the 1800s will have many thousands of living relatives, and if you have tens of thousands of samples, you could find one that will be *related* to a person. Take a celebrity from the 1800s, and I'm sure there is someone on this forum who can trace their genealogy back to that person - possibly not direct descent, but even a tangential connection will do (a cousin of the individual or something like that in the direct line). Now take a few tens of thousands of 1800s people. You'll almost certainly be able to find at least one relative for *everyone* on this forum. That's more like how I'm thinking they're doing it.

They have a heap of human detritus from a few centuries of habitation, and all they have to do is find some common bit of DNA with the person posing as family. The source DNA wouldn't even have to be in their direct line ... the source could've had a cousin who was, for example. Or, heck, a grandparent's sister's cousin's uncle. All you have to have is a few common points in the DNA; not an exact match.

I imagine the biggest logistical headache here isn't finding DNA that *might* be related but finding people who will agree to pose as relatives, if only for a DNA sample.

[brianv]

Crimes where DNA is used as evidence : "There is a 100,000,000:1 chance that it belongs to the accused."

You're talking about a match to a specific individual - not to anyone he might be related to. It's completely different. I doubt very much that they have samples from the actual victims, I bet they just have samples from the supposed victim's family, and all they have to do is find a related person who shares some common DNA.

Unless you believe they've got a toothbrush or whatever from every single victim, to do an exact match with. I kind of doubt that, given that the victims are imaginary.

You go out and dig up some bones and have it DNA tested then try finding the relatives of the bone.

They do that. Look up "Cheddar Man" for an example. Some Neolithic tribesman they dig up and in the nearby village they find a few dozens of relatives. Surprising? Not really, if you understand that the billions of humans on the planet today all come from just a few millions back then, and there's been thousands of years of interbreeding in between where all the genetic material is getting swapped around. Even if we just cloned ourselves he'd probably still have 1 or 2 relatives nearby, never mind sexual reproduction.

One person from the 1800s will have many thousands of living relatives, and if you have tens of thousands of samples, you could find one that will be *related* to a person. Take a celebrity from the 1800s, and I'm sure there is someone on this forum who can trace their genealogy back to that person - possibly not direct descent, but even a tangential connection will do (a cousin of the individual or something like that in the direct line). Now take a few tens of thousands of 1800s people. You'll almost certainly be able to find at least one relative for *everyone* on this forum. That's more like how I'm thinking they're doing it.

They have a heap of human detritus from a few centuries of habitation, and all they have to do is find some common bit of DNA with the person posing as family. The source DNA wouldn't even have to be in their direct line ... the source could've had a cousin who was, for example. Or, heck, a grandparent's sister's cousin's uncle. All you have to have is a few common points in the DNA; not an exact match.

I imagine the biggest logistical headache here isn't finding DNA that *might* be related but finding people who will agree to pose as relatives, if only for a DNA sample.

That's if you buy the whole DNA thing. Like I said earlier, I don't. Cheddar Man? Oh yeah? Sounds suspiciously like the dinosaurs thread which has just started! And a bit like the nuke hoax. Is "DNA" another Nuclear Option for the clowns?

[hoi.polloi]

A very close friend of mine studies DNA and vouches for its reality. When I've challenged him on it, he's presented adequate evidence to me - in a magnanimous way that contrasts highly with anyone I've asked about suspicious sciences like CERN, satellites, space probes, terrorist "drills", etc. - that he personally identified proteins from it and that they are getting many many people to do so all over the world.

So whatever my word is worth to you brianv, I'd encourage you to look into it yourself too. DNA seems very real based on my investigations, though admittedly dubious as a criminal investigation "catch all" that TV may claim it is.

[brianv]

A very close friend of mine studies DNA and vouches for its reality. When I've challenged him on it, he's presented adequate evidence to me - in a magnanimous way that contrasts highly with anyone I've asked about suspicious sciences like CERN, satellites, space probes, terrorist "drills", etc. - that he personally identified proteins from it and that they are getting many many people to do so all over the world.

So whatever my word is worth to you brianv, I'd encourage you to look into it yourself too. DNA seems very real based on my investigations, though admittedly dubious as a criminal investigation "catch all" that TV may claim it is.

Your word means a lot hoi.

[simonshack]

*

MAZZUCCO'S "HUMAN REMAINS"


Just a little trivial, xmas-time Sunday post for those of you afflicted with "9/11-vicsim-silliness-nostalgia"...


"Massimo Mazzucco, filmmaker - and curator of the Luogocomune.net website"

Today I bumped into a 2013 video by Massimo Mazzucco - the Italian 9/11 clown/gatekeeper extraordinaire who runs the troll-infested "Luogocomune" website - the 'go-to place' (unfortunately so) for your average Italian "Sunday-truther". Some of you may remember that Mazzucco was one of the first individuals to call me by phone (for one hour+) from Los Angeles (?) soon after my first 2007 release of September Clues, sternly lecturing me at length about cinematic techniques and how it would have been "technically impossible" to fabricate the images of the 9/11 event aired on TV. Later on, Mazzucco wrote a long, 'satirical' piece on his website - deriding the entire concept of image fakery as expounded by September Clues (and what was, at the time, called the 'no-plane' theory.)

11 Settembre 2001: Resti umani a Ground-Zero - by Massimo Mazzucco (2013)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iIecnQ1t9uo

This 2013 Mazzucco-video goes on about the 'human remains at Ground Zero' - and the 'mystery of how those victims (civilians and firefighters) were mostly pulverized into tiny bone fragments or fine dust'... In the video, Mazzucco comments on a "MAP OF VICTIM REMAINS" which, all by itself, had me laugh very loudly:



See, we are actually asked to believe that someone compiled this dotted 'record' of the exact locations where such organic remains were found, scattered about the Ground Zero rubble... To be sure, Mazzucco uncritically presents this map as some sort of credible document in support of his "Judy-Woodish" super-weapon insinuations. Of course, it should now be crystal clear to all Cluesforum readers that the role of gatekeepers such as Mazzucco is to keep hammering into our minds the idea of "thousands of innocent victims" perishing on 9/11...


From 2:50 onwards in that video, Mazzucco has compiled a string of American TV "news" casts announcing various numbers of "fresh, new human remains findings" around Ground Zero. I know, we are all sick & tired of all those 'magic numbers' being thrown at us by the MSM every day, what with that asinine cabalistic numerology / gematria meme. Nonetheless, I still find it remarkable how insanely obsessed the Nutwork is with this (seemingly MANDATORY) requirement that almost EVERY SINGLE scripted "news" item should contain the 'obligatory' numbers "9", "11" (or multiples thereof) or "7". Here's a transcript of these brief TV newscats extracts included in Mazzucco's video:

- "More human remains were found at the World Trade Center site on Wednesday. Crews made the discovery at 11 Water street" (...) The ME (Medical Examiner) is also investigating other remains that were found about two weeks ago on the roof of 90, West street."

- "Construction workers found 9 pieces of bone and tissue on a 20th-floor scaffolding on this building on West street." [9+2=11]

-"Workers have found 65 potential human remains at the World Trade Center site over the last couple of days..." [6+5=11]

-" Demolition workers found 74 new bone fragments on the roof of the Deutsche Bank over the weekend..." [7+4=11]

- "Crews continue to find human remains on the roof of the Deutsche Bank building, next to the Trade Center site, the medical examiner's office says 142 fragments were found, bringing to 598[5+9+8=22] the total of fragments found in the building..."

Mazzucco then reminds us that - as of the official NY Medical Examiner's tale, a total of "1100 victims" were never identified...



...and that a total of "700" bone fragments were found on the roof of the Deutsche Bank...


Needless to say (or perhaps not - reminders are always in order in this mad world of ours), the 'FINAL' official death toll of 9/11 released more than a decade after September 11, 2001 and now published on the official "Voices of September 11" National Museum Memorial at Ground Zero - is 2983. (2+9= 11 > 8+3 =11 / or 2+9+8+3=22).

I know, I know - you can't take it anymore - and neither can I ... but seasons greetings to y'all anyway!

[sunshine05]

The human remains map is the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen. Merry Christmas, Simon!