Do people still believe 911 wasnt a inside job?

If you disagree, what do you think it was? (...no doubt you will say: I don't know, something that doesn't fit the official story. zzzzzzz).

The news anchors presumed what ever entered the building exited - too. What they saw was a fireball, and if they were eagle-eyed fragments from the plane.
Not some 'nose cone' not a whole plane.
Stop living upto approx 11 am September 11 2001 and ignoring everything else.

Maybe the vast majority of people that don't think it was a CD, perhaps. Just sayin'.

 

Again with the speaking on behalf of those news anchors. That's not honest. If I were them, you would annoy me. You shouldn't presume to tell what they presumed. All they did was tell what they saw.

I know that the nose of a jet or plane cannot break through the outer wall with its nose intact; much less break through yet another outer wall intact as well.

What did you mean by this: "What they saw was a fireball, and if they were eagle-eyed fragments from the plane."

 

It appears that you didn't finish your sentence in your last post.

 

"in one side, completely through and out the other side....like a bad special effect"

Thats the problem with these guys. Its not a debate, as soon as you "corner" them they simply stick their fingers in their ears and then you have to cram it all down their throat due to their lack of experience and or knowledge when they degenerate it down to an incomprehensible grade school level of understanding requirement or lack of even that putting you in a position that to gain any kind of agreement you need to teach them a lifetime worth of experience and expertise only to have them say they still dont think it was a demolition. Like trying to teach a 5 year old quantum mechanics.

So I dont waste too much of my time aside than to post my ready mix pics which shows how foolish these denkers arguments really are.

Hell I used to get my best material from their sites when I was really into this studying this stuff. Frankly they are so easy I feel guilty sometimes.

Pictures are always worth a million words in a 911 parlor fest LOL

See they have no clue what they are talking about, here again, said on tv:

"in one side, completely through and out the other side....like a bad special effect"

every position these guys take in support of the official conpiracy theory has been destroyed many years ago.

 

Judging by the way the rest of Zzaps snippets work - it was probably a fragment from the corner impact fireball.
Judging by it's position and the angle of the plane on entry - it could have been something thrown frwd by the impact.
Take your pick.

 

As it happens, Odon provided the video of the anchors saying what they saw. It is ironic, is it not?

 

you can see how it was done but he cannot tell the difference by looking at them the elements initiating the failure.

Take note he run like hell from that challenge! LOL

nose out analysis





when you do what would be the equivalent of a linear regression on the pixels, you get a tada cgi fuckup that carried over in literally all the alleged plane videos



of course ask these guys and its

COINCIDENCE!

 

What they thought they saw.
He/they said the whole plane went through the other tower (meaning through WTC2).
We know better than that.
We have seen it closer and from a better angle than they did.
They were wrong - simple as that.
Are you now going to argue an entire plane made it through an entire building and fell out the other side? Surely not.

Tell that to Zzap.

- they obviously did not know that at the time.
Do you think they still think an entire plane made it through the entire building?

 

...and like I said - it didn't happen.

Hey look - this guy says that the Devils face appeared in the smoke.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16bPTlsf1Fc&feature=fvwrel"]Devil Face In the Twin Towers - YouTube

 

Now you are saying an aeroplane DID hit the towers and made it through to the other side.

Make up your mind.

 

edit: read the rest of your post...

 

If you listen, the camera man contradicts the newscaster. You have managed to even edit out what was said in it's entirety (thankfully not from the video).

Where in the 'official conspiracy theory' does it state: "in one side, completely through and out the other side.."? When did I say that?
You are arguing a point neither the 'official story' states or I have ever stated.
God only knows who actually believes what you are suggesting.

 

about time you noticed that!

that is a trademark of one of the cgi guys! LMAO

you will find that on lots of modified clips, dood is quite creative too.

Happy hunting

 

brinkly and fairbanks said that. as usual completely contradicts your claim.

 

yeh you keep posting that clip


here is the slo mo



wow even the tail starts to come out!

and of course smoke always "reflects" the sun, oh wow just like a fuselage would! LMAO





how do you spell cgi again?
LMAO

off course all of this fake plane shit is hiding something that you have no clue to even look for even though its in your face! LOL

 

I was being sarcastic. I saw that a long time ago.

What claim would that be?

*looks around* who exactly are you talking to?
Are you trying to convince yourself that I'm saying the plane made it in one side and out the other - even partially?
Ftr, I'm not - so it's probably a good idea to not try and respond to something I am not saying.
If others are saying that - go bother them with that.
I posted the clip to show the plane did NOT make it all the way through.

Are you using that to suggest the nose cone made it through the building - and that it is CGI?
Again, where have I ever said that?
I have said it is the start of a fireball - you agreed.
Why are you arguing a point that isn't being made here?

 

well unless you want to do what debunkers do...where it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck but you "believe" its really a horse.

No I disagreed that it was a start of a fireball in the context that you said it and went on to post pics why it wasnt and of course as usual you ignored them.

you already said you do not believe that a plane can go through the building, <--redact that much

well smoke, or dust does not reflect light like you can see reflecting off the fuselage and I posted the pics above showing how its reflecting light, like any plane would. even though we all know its cant be real.



nice polished fuselage!

to bad so sad that leaves cgi faked videos

its like they said on tv some really shitty cgi at that!

 

You said: "brinkly and fairbanks said that. as usual completely contradicts your claim."
I posted: ""in one side, completely through and out the other side.."" - I presumed that is the comment you were referring to.
So what claim of mine has been contradicted?

I have a feeling you are not grasping what is and isn't being said.

The smoke/dust or any fuselage is not reflecting light (per se) in either of our clips.
Your second clip has a really garish colour pallet.
If you look at either my clip or your smaller clip of the same footage - it is a variance in the debris/smoke/dust being ejected.
You seem to be posting a straw mans clip.
I'm not saying anything is being reflected.
You seem to have collected a plethora of comments made by others and are attributing them to me.
Arguing points that are not being made.
We both agreed it was a fireball - so posting an edited clip and saying I'm suggesting something I'm not is really dumb.
I seem to be wrong about something I never even said. Strange.

Not in any 'TV' you have posted.

 

another one of my favs is the building appearing to explode above the starboard wing before the wing is shown to touch the building.

man there is so much wrong with these crappy cgi's I dont even know where to start LOL



hint its the white glow spots that they want to hide.

see its even on the back, thats why they had to make the plane look like it went all the way through LOL



also on the side.

 

oh I edited the word games, doing 3 things at once, and that you said it did not go through LOL

yeh the abc one.

denying the impossible is possible again huh.

again dont gripe to me about the way they had to destroy a clip in those days to cgi it whine to fox. and cnn. and bbc

sweet! I love it when you debunkers blow your credibility right out the window like that

really? great nows your chance to show everyone dust and debris that reflects sunlight just like a shiny fuselage.

video citation please

also show me dust and debris that remains cylindrical for such a huge distance, then the same that reflects. fuselages do that quite well you know. so does cgi

oh and btw how come there is always a white flash just before a plane part covers it up?