It was a bomb, not a second plane, who said a second plane...I saw it no second plane!

As I said, seriously pathetic. Everyone should weigh this up, we have the accounts of well over a hundred first responders who saw a plane. Most people who have friends from New York who were there recall seeing the plane from near and far. We have a substantial number of videos, plane impacts going inwards, plane parts, flight records, ATC accounts etc, all noted in detail. Then we have some bullshit video that has disappeared, that "ooooh, couldn't possibly have been doctored', or was crap quality or was badly positioned or some other batshit.

Hmmmm, tough one that. Then we ask why is this person still posting after conceding everything!

 

Not convincing sir, in the least.

 

whats not convincing about:

"I just caught the second explosion on videotape...No, a bomb, I saw it, NO PLANE HIT NOTHIN, the building exploded from the other tower floors down."

At 2:15 he says it with 0 uncertainty.

No one in that thread disputed the claim! Suffice to say this guy did not make anything up, he was explaining it to his friend live, whats not convincing, and what is your reason its not convincing?

 

Noise. What's not convincing about batshit hearsay and some clown who didn't see a plane on his crummy videotaping?
For starters, if he "caught it on videotape" he wasn't looking at the tower, he would have been looking at his tiny 2x1 inch LCD display on his crappy low-resolution video screen. Unreliable witness, now his sole means to verify the plane is reliant on the video. So unconvincing?
What damn camera, where was he when he filmed it, what resolution was it, where IS IT!?

And, you are still here dumping your no-plane horseshit on the forum.

 

I need much more to review this.

This pic is absolutely useless, for all we know it was from a plane that crashed into a mountain.

I need to know exactly which buildings this was allegedly "lodged between" so at a minimum we can determine how it could have possibly been lodged there without leaving any marks on the building. I can understand the rope being broken if they pulled it in there with a truck and it got lodged.

So far not too convincing.

 

There you have it folks, now they are claiming that first hand witness testimony is batshit hearsay. What next?

 

Then there is the little matter of Purdue, they kindly proved my point for me, and its all hidden in plain sight! Actually its not hidden at all, things that are hidden in plain sight are merely things that you did not know until a truther comes along and points it out.



they shot an aluminum can full of fluid at a hunk of iron to simulate the wing of a high speed plane, with fuel smashing into a steel column, yep it did exactly what I said it would do!

Thanks Purdue!

that and there is another thing it proves, another thing that did not happen in either of the alleged plane impacts, but had to happen if a plane in fact impacted a steel structure...........see who can figger it out

 

I am really getting sick of you misrepresenting my quotes and my position! YOU are the one making the hearsay comment! Do you get that? I see no video of him saying anything and from what commentary I have seen elsewhere, my other comment which you conveniently ignored is entirely on the money!

"For starters, if he "caught it on videotape" he wasn't looking at the tower, he would have been looking at his tiny 2x1 inch LCD display on his crappy low-resolution video screen. Unreliable witness, now his sole means to verify the plane is reliant on the video. So unconvincing?
What damn camera, where was he when he filmed it, what resolution was it, where IS IT!?"

And what the hell, you have the absolute gall to DISMISS well over a hundred first-hand witness statements, from the heroes who responded to the terrorist attacks, stating they saw a damn plane!

 

Where's the link to this?

If you cite Purdue to suggest your ridiculous claim there was no galling, then Purdue has a lot more to say that suggests a plane will EASILY pass through the exterior! Would you like to explain your "truther" position on that occurring or shall I fetch it?


Oh look, they didn't pencil in some stupid galling. The intense, INTENSE heat generated during the high velocity impact is going to minimalize any impact friction by effectively turning the incoming projectile to an almost liquid state.

 

There's a word for this kind of thing.

 

Me? I posted his quotes. The quotes were not challenged by planers, it goes without saying the quotes were correct. This is not a court.

Speculative conjecture no basis in fact.

And what the hell, you have the absolute gall to DISMISS well over a hundred first-hand witness statements, from the heroes who responded to the terrorist attacks, stating they saw NO damn plane!

Oops!

In the purdue documentary. I dig these up from the archives. Im sure its still out there somewhere since its pro planer.

It proves galling, all the documentary does is say thats what they did nothing material, either way we can all see its a can with fluid impacting a solid object and we can all see the galled metal despite the absurdly nonsensical "intense heat claim". Point proven for all reasonable people.

Here you go folks there is the hand wave dismissal of galling.

numbers please, "intense" is meaningless drama jibberish with no numeric value.

 

MEH! And this from somebody who keeps wittering on about evidence and courts! It is hearsay! I don't even care if it is accurate in its quoted content.

Ok then, you tell me how he video tapes something in 2001. Anyone who owned a camera at that time spent virtually the whole time looking at the screen to ensure the camera captured the scene correctly! Even today, people do this same thing with their cell phones!

And where is this damn video! The one I saw pertaining to this was shot a considerable distance away.

Bullshit! Stop making crap up. If people see things it trumps people not in a position to see the same thing!

Then find it and quit with this vague bullshit.

No it doesn't. It proves superficial galling on their demo which is not an airliner at 550mph hitting the WTC1/2.

Seriously? You are disputing the way the plane enters the building now?

That discounts you. Point proven for an aluminum can filled with water, at the speed of the demo and the object it hit!

The "folks" think you are talking batshit. As for numbers, you said you were done. Debating with you is futile and like pulling teeth. If you calculate the kinetic energy of the plane at impact it is enormous. If you don't think there is an incredible heat conversion at this point then carry on thinking that, because you are yanking everyone's chain here with your "I concede" crap and now coming back with yet more of this ridiculous, insane claim. I don't give a rat's ass whether you understand anything given to you.

 

Understand I'm not saying there were no explosions. There were explosions and all present heard them. There were explosions because explosive devices were placed in the buildings long before 11 September.

I'm saying a drone 767 was present and did strike the building. All pictures of that strike showed a cluster of airplane parts continuing on a trajectory towards the ground and the Burlington factory. Indeed, that cluster of parts was found years later.

I don't doubt Crenshaw is telling the truth as best he knows it, but in the concrete canyons of NYC perspective is limited. Airplanes struck the buildings, but the airplanes were NOT American 11 and United 175.

 

A quick summary:

• The plane was witnessed by over a hundred first responders - point proven for all reasonable people.
• The plane was captured from dozens of different viewpoints by members of the public - point proven for all reasonable people.
• Plane parts all over the crash site - point proven for all reasonable people.
• Radar tracked all planes - point proven for all reasonable people.
• All planes were scheduled as recorded - point proven for all reasonable people.
• Passenger/flight crew/terrorists DNA was verified in many cases - point proven for all reasonable people.
• It is IMPOSSIBLE to overlay a fixed composite onto a moving target! - point proven for all reasonable people.
• There is not one tiny scrap of hard evidence supporting a conspiracy to avoid using planes - point proven for all reasonable people.
• ALL passengers and flight crew on ALL planes are no longer alive, yet all are proven to have been on board - point proven for all reasonable people.
• BRAINLESLY obvious, the impact is inwards. Not even open for debate - point proven for all reasonable people.

 

Bullshit, prove it!
Explain how the hell they did it, how these psychopathic demolition experts were recruited,offer one tiny scrap of evidence for it! Or, as is usual, go quiet or arm wave everything away.

Bullshit. Explain the following:

• What happened to the real planes and passengers?
• How the hell did they divert them or whatever batshit is claimed!?
• Why the hell would they complicate this whole thing a thousand percent by doing this?
• How did they fake the passenger communications?

 

it took me a moment to realize what an over-the-top stupid claim that is!

The fluid filled can actually showed signs of cooling for those familiar with infrared!

thousands of gallons of ice cold fuel to cool anything it touched below ambient temperature as it flowed, and here we see one of the most irrational ludicrous claims on the subject that I've ever seen in 911 threads.

especially since Purdue demonstrated that galling occurred without any heating much less intense heating, proving the point because we can see this as the aluminum was grey (cool) experiencing no increase temperature and there's no change in color on the target, proving that galling has to be seen in a high velocity impact which I'm sure was a totally unintended consequence of their test, but there it is folks!

And what's even more hilarious is that this claim contradicts Purdue 'experts' that planers rely on, by inferring that what the experts at Purdue felt was a valid proof of concept is invalid. I find that quite comical.

There is not one speck of galling anywhere as a result of aluminum impacting with steel, and there has to be galling if aluminum impacting with steel is true at any velocity!

And if it were melted due to this imaginary intense heat that is being claimed it would be even worse! The fuel would have cooled it immediately around the columns and there would be huge gobs of aluminum stuck all over the place.

Anyway I just thought I'd point that out for people who wanted to see some over the top crazy **** for a good laugh

 

There comes a point when you recognize the futility. You can explain things to people but unfortunately you cannot understand it for them.

When an object strikes another at 550mph the release of kinetic energy generates heat that is off the scale. When the retort is some crap about the color of the aluminum on something that looks nothing like correct infrared , there is simply no way you can educate this level of ignorance. I've asked this person to supply the source for the experiment and he hasn't. Despite this person playing his obvious chain yanking "I concede everything" card, he is still offering more of this moronic "no plane" insanity. We all know the word for this behaviour.

Also, when someone who exhibits appalling physics comprehension labels something that is totally obvious as "stupid", you know there is no way to reach them. On an experiment the can 3 inches across, left residual galling of around 1 inch on the inwards facing side. There is nothing to suggest that this is a proportional effect, meaning any contact area would likely also be about 1 inch in size for an aircraft.

All viewers with eyes can see that every single image has nowhere near sufficient resolution to see this, notwithstanding that the heat generated by the impact would massively decrease friction. So much so that the plane would enter the building in a state more resembling a fluid.

Not forgetting the REALLY obvious thing, that the damn impact point is going inwards!

 

Further to above I have tracked down the source for the test. As I suspected it was a calibration test that was used to extrapolate how the actual impact from a plane, would enter the building and how much damage it would cause.

https://www.cs.purdue.edu/homes/cmh/simulation/phase3/FluidEx.htm
"Experiment - Propelled by compressed air, a can of liquid is shot at the instrumented target at approximately 80 m/sec. The can ruptures, spreading the fluid. Impact forces are measured by instrumentation of the target barrier."

A big problem in direct comparison is immediate. This is 179mph.

Downloadable avi file:
https://jumpshare.com/embed/tHyVvbWcBQcpFKFCkohm

This article is about the Pentagon impact, but it highlights the intense forces generated by the kinetic energy release!
https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a5659/debunking-911-myths-pentagon/
"A crashing jet doesn’t punch a cartoon-like outline of itself into a reinforced concrete building, says ASCE team member Mete Sozen, a professor of structural engineering at Purdue University. In this case, one wing hit the ground; the other was sheared off by the force of the impact with the Pentagon’s load-bearing columns, explains Sozen, who specializes in the behavior of concrete buildings. What was left of the plane flowed into the structure in a state closer to a liquid than a solid mass."

 

What Purdue University demonstrated was that it is subservient to the Deep State. Popular Mechanics and quite a few others too. They publish the falsehoods they are instructed to publish.

 

What utter hogwash. Now we have a conspiracy whereby very informed academics/experts are all lying or fudging because of the "ebil gubment".

There is a major problem with a small section of society, driven by the Dunning Kruger effect, we have a conveyor-belt of endless batshit conspiracies that come out to prop up ever more ridiculous, evidence-less, unproven batshit conspiracy theories.

 

Yes, we have a conveyor-belt of endless batshit apologies that come out to prop up ever more ridiculous, evidence-less, unproven batshit official conspiracy theories.

Yes, they are the believers that made a religion out of the government.

 

Thay were certainly busted in many circles with that crappy model they made, Ace Baker busted them too.

 

you already have a thread for conspiracy talk, here: http://www.politicalforum.com/index...asible-problems-with-no-planes-on-911.612050/ please use it and refrain from posting that **** in my thread.

 

Hilarious - just hot-air and noise. After this person conceded everything, here they are posting the same meaningless rhetoric and more horseshit again. Apparently, asking obvious things like, where are the real planes etc. is "conspiracy talk".

 

yes you created your own devoid of forensics footsie playing parlor babble thread, why dont you save the parlor babble for your thread and leave mine out of it.

You failed to prove much less provide ANY evidence what so ever that ANY claim I made is either bullshit or batshit. Actually you have proven its the claims we see from believers that deserve that title!