Do people still believe 911 wasnt a inside job?

I'm not griping about any destroyed tape. Why would I when there is ample footage available.

How far is this 'huge distance'? You might find it's only apparent in one of your clips where the editing is selective and the colour pallet is poor.

You really can't multi-task - can you?

 

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?

 

find anything you want that shows dust staying cylindrical and reflecting and post it. I will figure out the exact distance after you do, which we both know you wont. nonexistent

pretty apparent in your clip too, maybe you need glasses



ps the quality in yours is WAY worse than mine.

theres just no place you can go pal

ha! you can even see it on your bbc version with contrast turned off.


look how easy it is to see it on the normal contrast version that you were complaining about.

 

you said no commentator mentioned it <- I redacted that

however you still believe it was debris not cgi and have the task of showing airborne cylindrical debris that perfectly retains its diameter resulting from an explosion that reflects light like a fuselage.


so which plane do you like better?

version 2 that actually looks like a plane and is correctly banking




or version one, (the first one aired)
that looks like a bird and is banking in the wrong direction?



That blackbird is my personal fav!

 

I said: nowhere in the 'official conspiracy theory' and nowhere did I say it.

Like I said, how far is it supposed to be? In 'slow-mo' it seems like it is for an epic distance - in reality it is not.
Again, you are creating an argument nobody here is arguing.
It is the start of a fireball that starts and ends in a matter of seconds.
The 'cone' you seem to be referring to is smoke/dust.
The important part is seeing the fireball start and end - which is difficult because I do not think there is much footage of the second exit over the first.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPvi8sOGN5U"]9-11 Plane Crash (Super Angle) - YouTube

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WzZweMDirnc"]UA175 WTC second hit x8 slowmo 9/11 (extended) - YouTube

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyVWJa-8ugU"]WTC 2 impact # 21 - YouTube


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3iKLz4oatY"]Clear shot of plane hitting tower two and tower in goes up... - YouTube

...as you can see, there is a variance in the colour of the smoke/dust etc...
....slowed down/colour pallet ruined - obviously it is going to look like something it isn't.

 

If you want to get a feeling for how long it was I am sure a talented person like you can figure out how to determin the length right?



there is at leaset 50 showing 20 - 30 more comes out before the flames, I love the way it reflects the sun

yeh well you are showing the wrong side, you are showing the going in side (s) and we were talking about the coming out side (n)

the last one shows the coming out side and does not show the plane at all.

otherwise I have been showing those same inees all along in slo mo!



see those bright white flashes not attached to anything that would be caused by the alleged plane! People said it was a rocket and it was simply a bomb in the building reflecting off of the fuselage if anyone can believe that it really was a plane in the first place.

the other one has the plane with the magically disappearing wing.

I am telling ya man its a whole new world in slo mo!


no wrong, you dont get dust clouds that make a 50+ foot long fuselage looking silhouette in 3 d. Not gonna happen. Ever!

 

Not really, no.

To my eyes it looks like smoke.
Others have said aluminium cladding (hence your so-called reflection) others say it is an engine.
I really have not seen satisfactory footage.
If it is aluminium cladding it explains the ricocheting debris.
If it is an engine it explains the size and shape - but does not explain the exit wound.
I would imagine it is smoke.
The aluminum cladding is also being detached/ejected too - judging by some of the pictures and video (yes even the video I posted).
There is definitely some missing/dislodged.
We know it wasn't the nose-cone that's for sure.
It not worth you going on and on and on about other people claiming it is a nose-cone or 'this doesn't look like a nose-cone', because nobody is claiming it is (here).
If you wish to reminisce about the good old days when others were saying it was, and you were 'lol'ng' about it - sorry those days are passed - certainly not going to happen here, anyway.

I'm not going to post anymore footage or any more testimony - I think it was a plane and you don't.

Not a world I wish to live in - you stay there if you wish.

 

No, Odon, I am not arguing that a whole plane made it through intact, and I have made that clear. In fact, I believe that the aluminum hull would not have sliced through the steel facade of the building and melt right into it. The nose would have been shredded and would not have reformed itself as it went through the building and approached the opposite wall.

Certainly, the core-structure would have shredded it even further. Well, unless the plane missed the core-structure completely. Of course, if that were the case, then we're left with an undamaged core-structure, and you're left with an even more impossible collapse scenario to defend. aren't you? This is denial revisited.

Also, you're saying something that is contradictory. You claim that it was smoke coming out that exit hole. Yet, you claim that it may have been an engine that made the hole. So, was it an engine or was it smoke? Obviously, smoke doesn't punch holes is steel walls to make way for the following fireball.

And what do you think about the flashes of light above the wing in the clips Zzap provided. I mean, the wing hadn't even touched the building yet. Is that wild or what?

 

Thread needs moar Reptilian Shapeshifters.

 

And I know someone who needs moar something.

 

qft

 

I said "others say it is an engine".
I then said: "I would imagine it is smoke.
The aluminum cladding is also being detached/ejected too - judging by some of the pictures and video."

I'm done answering any more of your questions till you answer a few off mine - or atleast engage a little more.

 

Topics like this have lost interest with me, because after a while it's just people arguing back and forth about the same tired shit. It's gotten older than the Kennedy assassination in ten years than the Kennedy assassination got in 50 years.

 

INdeed. Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience.

 

That can't be spelt right :smilielol5:

Seriously, I know what you mean - but I tend to get dragged into this type of thing : /

 

By 'dragged' you mean, willfully enter into the discussion.

 

:leaving:

 

When you all get a little more experience, you'll know how to stay out of threads that don't interest you.

 

Join Date: May 2004
Location: Rochester, NY
Age: 31
Posts: 22,393

 

But for those who are interested in the meat of the argument, and not this moaning coming from the peanut gallery, I would recommend page seventy-four.