thats because it was taken from battery park DUH! if you wanted HD NFL quality you should have taken the damn things yourself. it gets the point across bigga bodda booma! in fact anyone who has ever seen ordinance go off can see wtc1 was blown too. not that it can be proven to anyone since troughers will come out here claiming they have seen ordinance and it does not look like it to them, but then they cant see their faces to shave LMAO oh and btw EWG if you watch carefully, you can see the layers coming through that white wing! They really (*)(*)(*)(*)ed up because as the wing progresses you can see the already blown out columns with the right wing superimposed on top of it. in fact if you are on your toes those shadows that should not be there because the sun is supposed to be there is the building being blown out even before the plane gets near it. if it was not such an american tragedy it would be one of the funniest comedy shows I have seen in a long time. its not what can be found thats wrong with 911 its what can be found right with it thats the problem!
Get some pictures that have not been pixilated all to hell and we might be able to have an intelligent conversation about what a load of crap your theories are.
well you just blew off a pic in the last thread that was crystal clear, pretending it did not show precisely what it as posted to demonstrate again crystal clear pic, face you are are just (*)(*)(*)(*)ing obtuse.
Only in your opinion, and I cannot see where you get the chops to expect people to accept your opinion. The lead bullet business is also irrelevant simply because it is about lead encased in bronze striking solid steel. If you are paying attention, you will see that the lead actually becomes a liguid, as does at least some of the steel. It takes a boit of time for the steel to yield to the forces applied. The planes did not have to liquify the columns of the towers, but, rather, just shoive them out of the way.
that can be said of any penetration, more of the same song and dance. Anyone who understands the extents of these cute little "in the micro box" scenarios you posit and pontificate as fact and is honest has no choice but to agree with me, and anyone who understands these things frankly are laughing at you for posting such bat(*)(*)(*)(*) crazy trash and me for wasting my time with troughers in the first place.
The Hezarkhani video, as it first appeared on the net, showed far more detail on the building. The shadows can be cast even in the shade in a city, because there are a lot of other sources of reflected light. You got SQUAT there. Pure bull (*)(*)(*)(*). It used to be part of my job to sit and watch Air Force aircraft and Army field artillery blow up all kinnds of stuff in fire power demonstrations. Later, I served with an Army Engineer battalion and was sometimes asked to photograph demolitions operations. I do not have any of the photos I took during that time because they were obviously not for public use. I saw absolutely NOTHING that at all resembled explosive ordnance going off anywhere in any footsage from ANY location on 9/11. I watched both towers fail on live TV, and was not the least bit surprised that it happened. The short timem that it took for the towers to fail surprised me only slightly, but any questions I had regarding that were answered when I saw the way they were put together. I was then surprised that they lasted that long. Your credentials to make that assment, please? No, we cannot see any such thing. Your gif does not contain enough detail to tell that this is not a cheap home produced movie special effect. You have totally corrupted a probably already corrupted image beyond usefulness for any forensic purposes. its not what can be found thats wrong with 911T its what can be found right with it thats the problem!
The quality is irellavant since it shows the detail needed to make the point, there were no higher buildings to reflect down on the wtc. the rest is blanket denial as I would expect.
picture quality and a fact is 2 different things, thanks for boringusto(*)(*)(*)(*)ingtears with another red herring though.
Which is poorer? The quality of his gifs or the quality of his arguments? Serious race to the bottom right there.
No, choice 3 would be for you to post something in a coherent fashion, that's not replete with twisted pretzel-like logic, and isn't buried by a wall of low grade, useless gifs. The day that occurs is the day someone might respond to one of your posts in a thoughtful manner, and might even consider that you actually have something worth reading and responding to. It would be a vast understatement to say that day is unlikely to ever occur.
A picture should only be presented if useful intelligence can be obtained from it. Degraded gifs of events that we have witnessed in sharper detail provide no intelligence worth discussing.
the same can be said for most trougher posts. So many troughers come out here and they can only parrot: so much heat so much fire so much weight hey did you know heat can weaken steel; that is why those buildings faw down. When you ask troughers to give you an intelligent response that properly describes their claim, do you know what they say? so much heat so much fire so much weight hey did you know heat can weaken steel; that is why those buildings faw down. then when you really press them you get to the bottom of things and they respond with too much heat too much fire too much weight hey did you know heat can weaken steel; that is why those buildings faw down. Like I said it sucks for troughers that so much was captured on camera and troughers have no way out of their box now days. btw did you notice how (*)(*)(*)(*)ty that pentagon pics are from the government, but that ok because they are government, everyone else better have an nfl camera crew or troughers whine. They should all move to cheese country so they can better enjoy their whine.
No sane fire fighter contends that there was not enough fire, or that the remaining columns were unable to support the weight of the structure above the fire, especially after they had been weakened by heat. If you have some proof YOU have to bring it. Your assertion is contrary to common sense and accepted principles of structural engineering and fire science. Neither you nor those arguing the 911T side are authorities on the subject. You are going to have to do better than bare assertions. You do not get to do that. For this statement to make any sense, you would need to bring images that actually support your crap. You do not. You bring images that are degraded to the pointed that they could have been crafted on your own home computer while you were stoned. We have better quality images of the same events which do not show any of what you claim to see. There was no reason for a camera to have focused on the spot where the aircraft is visible on any of the three tapes. That they caught any image at all is a marvel. That the images that they did catch are exactly where they would have to be to support the accepted narrative is a steel-toed boot to the crotch of the tin-foil team. Normal people are not obligated to provide pictures that support what pretty much all witnesses on the scene describe. The reality-deniers need to bring some actual evidence. It aint happening. They should all move to cheese country so they can better enjoy their whine.
well I have news for you sense is not common as troughers have unanimously proven. thats right firefighters are clueless and do not know how much of anything it would take do do anything. already brought it, you have to understand it. really? tell us what my official qualifications are then oops you dont know. More guesswork on your part. LMAO Its not because there were not cameras but because thugs unlwfully confiscated everyones cameras. conspiracy claimants (the government) have to prove their conspiracy theory and they failed miserable and its so in everyones face now days only hard core propaganda spinners with no moral compass still spin that trash.
You do not get to do that. Fire fighters knew when they went in there that, if they could not find a way to fight the fire, the buildings would collapse at least partly. They just had no way of knowing how badly the core was damaged or how fragile the floors actually were. All you have brought so far is your disinformed opinion. As far as I can tell, squat. Unlawfully? It is unlawful to do surveilance of government property. The only camera that showed anything was the Double Tree, and that video has been made public. You got that bass ackwards. There is evidence, both from eyewitnesses and physical remains of the aircraft what happened. You got nothing but the opinions of a bunch of drooling lunatics, idiots and Nazi revolutionaries that anything else happened.
oh thats right they had their crystal ball and consulted their guru! you mean expert opinion. oh thats right, the government created the people I forgot. cant trust eyewitnesses the ones that model the official story saw everything from a c5 to a bumblebee, need evidence, no evidence no fact, no facts its a lie. Yeh I know the nazis were running the show at the time and their stories are incredibly lame.
I am not even going to try to deal with that word salad with quotes. None of it makes sense. The average of the eyewitness accounts has a twin engine jet coming in almost on the deck and banking left just before impact. The three images recorded coincide with this object's being the size of a 757, as does the impact mark. That is a fact that neither you nor drooling degenrates like Stubblebine or Bunel, nor Nazi scum like Bollyn can alter.
Like that deranged twit gallop. I know. So freaking WHAT? There is no physical evidence of explosives or thermite at any of the locations.
how do you know? You dont. They destroyed all the evidence that was inconvenient. samples were taken howeve that proved to have thermetic material and iron sheres, you lose again.
koko still doesn't understand that Harrit/Jones et al didn't find thermite either. He doesn't do science, I bet he never even read the Bentham paper. He accuses others of following by blind faith, and yet he follows the thermite hoax and never even read the science behind it. The hypocrisy is hilarious.
nah they found chips that burned just like thermate it looks, acts and qaucks like a duck but its really a billy goat.
