You cant tell the impact site from the security camera. Secondly compression of the video can yield incorrect values. Third it is hilarious making a scientific measurement using a ruler on a computer monitor as your basis of theory.
http://www.thenewamerican.com/artman/uploads/planepieces_nns_.jpg
Note plane fragments with American Airlines paint job in foreground
Prepare for the standard tinfoil deconstruction of that
(neocon links, "ignored this piece of evidence", etc.)Obviously a puppet of the neo-cons, GWB, or both.
btw I love these tools citing a North Dakota National Guard pilot as shooting down the plan in Penn. Maybe they failed geography or something? Fargo isnt near Penn, except in the Twilight Zone!
Rivers of Steel found at the bottom of the WTC. I read your link and don't see anything that explains this as nothing mentioned in it provides any evidence that anything burned hot enough to melt steel at any given point in time. So long as there is doubt about one peice of evidence there is doubt placed on all conclusions we are supposed to agree with.
If doubt remains anywhere it should remain everywhere.
I can't swallow the story because what I see and what I'm told don't match up and I'm not given conclusive proof to agree.
Reminds me of JFK and the magic bullet.
Not sure if this has been posted in this thread yet, but this is a great paper on the WTC collapse:
http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html
http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html
ahh you two, no three demensional thinking at all going on in your heads
I'm not saying that it was the right plane or not but a fully functional brain would tell you this
at the point of impact the height of the pentagon is the same in the video as in real life, there you have your point of comparison, doesnt matter if the plane is 1m from the camera or 1km from the camera its still the same size compared to the actual height of the building
judasmachine
Diamond Member
- Sep 15, 2002
- 8,515
- 3
- 81
two things, and they'll contradict themselves...
1. I don't know what that white streak was.
2. The flight 77 is gone right? I mean 100+ people are missing/dead...
1. I don't know what that white streak was.
2. The flight 77 is gone right? I mean 100+ people are missing/dead...
Required amount of explosives makes no difference. With enough man power and time you can do just about anything after hours. You could dress up as a cleaner and haul around a hundred pounds of the stuff in your cart without anyone being wiser. That's just one example. Someone not as tired as I am right now can probably come up with other solutions.
Far as I know it cannot be proven since the US eliminated the evidence via scrap sold and the rest burried somewhere. You would need the government to launch an independent investigation to provide information on how this occured. That would need to include samples from various parts of the molten steel at the base of the WTC. Chances are this is now impossible.
It's not a conclusion as you are suggesting I'm alluding to. It's a theory that happens to fit the facts. Far as I know the government did not address this in a conclusive report. It also doesn't matter what others think of it unless they happen to debunk his theory with their own theory. None of which can be proven. This includes the government's thoery (not fact).
Also if you want to talk about peer review how about the sloppy work on the official report and the toying with the formulas as if they wanted to make the facts fit what they want to say. I doubt that a report like this would get past my college professor much less a peer review. And it hasn't. Unless you are talking about government appointed/hired people. Hardly a shining example of a review without bias.
Gibsons
Lifer
- Aug 14, 2001
- 12,530
- 35
- 91
Even the k00kboi sites acknowledge it's going to take more than a few hundred pounds, and you're going to have to apply it directly to the beams in thick layers. Yeah, it's *possible*. But this would've been noticed by non-conspirators at the WTC, and would likely take dozens, if not hundreds, of co-conspirators to actually do the work. Just how big is this conspiracy, anyway?
you people never cease to amaze me
I don't like this administration, yet I'm able to look at things objectively.
#1 - a PLANE hit the Pentagon, period. We know the flight, we know who was onboard, people saw it flying and striking the building...end of discussion, bad video or no bad video.
#2 - both WTC towers collapsed from being struck, and the subsequent fires, by 2 large planes full of fuel for cross-country trips.
#3 - buildings near the WTC were damaged and/or destroyed by hundreds of thousands of tons of material from the WTC collapses.
/thread
I don't like this administration, yet I'm able to look at things objectively.
#1 - a PLANE hit the Pentagon, period. We know the flight, we know who was onboard, people saw it flying and striking the building...end of discussion, bad video or no bad video.
#2 - both WTC towers collapsed from being struck, and the subsequent fires, by 2 large planes full of fuel for cross-country trips.
#3 - buildings near the WTC were damaged and/or destroyed by hundreds of thousands of tons of material from the WTC collapses.
/thread
I don't see why its so hard to understand that the WTC towers fell because the beams were weakened by the heat. Hot steel is not nearly as strong as colder steel.
Well considering what all the wackos who support it claim. I would say it involves thousands of people including hundreds of regional air traffic controllers and hundreds of governmental employees.
Well considering what all the wackos who support it claim. I would say it involves thousands of people including hundreds of regional air traffic controllers and hundreds of governmental employees.
Evidence suggests that the WTC towers were brought down by explosives.
http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html
http://www.911blogger.com/files/video/911eyewitness_wtc1.wmv
I sure did, along with video and audio of large explosions before the towers fell, and dust clouds coming up from the streets before they fell.
I was there, so quit conning me. If you think you can distinguish massive cracking and smashing of reinforced concrete bars (and the accompanying dust) from explosions, only by using THAT recording, then you must surely be not just the world's foremost specialist in demolition, but also the only forensic who can make that distinction.
I think you're conning yourself. Reporters and fire fighters reported those same explosions before the WTC towers fell.
Even more explosions before the towers fell
911 Eyewitness
OK so now that this thread is going to be hijacked by tinfoilers rehashing for the 200th time their stupid video links and OMG911WTFBBQ.net, can we lock it?
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter