[Moderated]175 did NOT hit the South tower.

[SOMERLED]

Yeah, maybe at the McDonalds in Israel.

Everywhere else it goes vertically downward faster than the speed of gravity

You could always stick a banger in the middle of the burger and light it.
Then, when the banger went off, you would have your own mini WTC attack.

 

[T.A.M.]

The top section of the WTC is your fist falling 2-3 storeys atop the rest of the skyscraper, represented by the burger. The amount of energy, kineticly, from this height, and with that amount of mass, makes the analogy, at least for expositional purposes, somewhat accurate. You do not even have to hit the burger very hard with your fist, to make the contents eject horizontally.

Another example would be a hammer hitting a can of soda. The soda (the contents) splatters out horizontally. The burger analogy is simply easier to visualize.

TAM

 

[twinstead]

This is not the analogy I would have chosen, however it will do.
How do you get the contents of the sandwich to splatter out of the sides, without belting it with your hand?

The hand represents the weight of the building above the impact sites falling suddenly on to the rest of the building.

 

[SOMERLED]

I was going to address this, but I see it's already been done to death. Have you come to your senses and conceded that Raytheon made no such admission, and that these flights indeed had pilots?

The question is whether you could convince a panel of unbiased scientists, and the answer to that is that you clearly could not.


Yes, my little boys do this same trick when they plug their ears with their fingers and yell "NA NA NA NA NA!"


OK, how about not very hot, oxygen-starved fires? Those are the kind that produce white smoke.

Let me refer you to post 2214.

 

[SOMERLED]

Drop the top 20 floors of a 110-story skyscraper on it?

From what height?
Are you saying that the building 'pancaked'?

 

[lapman]

Kindly consider this Italian page on WTC7.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=MAZ20070503&articleId=5550

Kindly consider this Italian page on WTC7.

 

[SOMERLED]

The top section of the WTC is your fist falling 2-3 storeys atop the rest of the skyscraper, represented by the burger. The amount of energy, kineticly, from this height, and with that amount of mass, makes the analogy, at least for expositional purposes, somewhat accurate. You do not even have to hit the burger very hard with your fist, to make the contents eject horizontally.

Another example would be a hammer hitting a can of soda. The soda (the contents) splatters out horizontally. The burger analogy is simply easier to visualize.

TAM

I refer you to my previous post. In a nutshell, are you maintaining that the south tower 'pancaked'?

 

[pomeroo]

Kindly produce one scintilla of genuine evidence to support any portion of any part of anything you say.

You dishonestly pretend to be looking for a "scintilla" of genuine evidence, but you wave away a mountain of it with your magic wand.

Forensic examiners are part of your imaginary conspiracy.

Thousands of eyewitnesses watching Flight 175 crash into the South Tower are either deluded or part of the Impossibly Vast Conspiracy.

Newspaper editors who print the seating positions of the hijackers are part of your imaginary conspiracy.

The transcripts of air traffic controllers discussing the hijackings have been faked.

The two hundred-plus researchers employed by NIST and the eight hundred scientists and engineers consulted by the agency are either incapable of applying basic principles of science or part of your imaginary conspiracy.

Every demolition expert who rejects your fantasy about explosives in the Twin Towers--and that's ALL of them--is either incompetent or part of your imaginary conspiracy.

Independent physicists, avionics techs, pilots, and structural engineers who debunk the implausible myths you peddle are part of your imaginary conspiracy.

Your beliefs are faith-based nonsense that rely entirely on bogus science, transparent fabrications, and outright falsehoods.

 

[uk_dave]

Have you got that infoemation from your local fire station yet?
Remember, you did make the claim.

I have no idea what you're talking about.

My one and only published comment to you on this thread was a suggestion that YOU go and speak with your local authority building control department so that they can advise you regarding the performance of steel in fire.

I know you haven't done so, because I also know that you're not interested in the truth.

I will not make any more direct comments to you because I think you have certain disadvantages and I find it all rather sad.

 

[pomeroo]

Will this do,
December 1, 1984 - NASA Dryden experiment flew a Boeing 720 via remote control; 1994 - NASA test involved 110 landings of a Boeing 737 airliner using GPS navigation; September 6, 2001 - Raytheon and the U.S. Air Force demonstrate new technology aircraft precision approach and landing system; September 10, 2001 - Wife of David Kovalcin said her husband woke her up in the middle of the night complaining he couldn't sleep and that he seemed "very distressed" but she didn't know why; 9/11 - Five Raytheon employees are on three of the four hijacked planes)

No, it won't do at all. Your falsehood about pilotless airliners has been exposed.

You have yet to acknowledge that you were lying when you pretended that heavily armored Boeing airliners exist.

 

[SOMERLED]

Kindly consider this Italian page on WTC7.

I will be pleased to correct the numerous mistakes in this very poor hit piece, just as soon as you answer the questions raised in the piece I posted.

 

[lapman]

If you can land the plane, then you can most certainly draw it into a homing beacon. You have a guaranteed take off and delivery.

However, if it was remote controlled or homed in, there would not have been the erratic maneuvers the airplane did right before it hit. The plane would have been wings level and not in a bank. The same goes for a military pilot.

You have no humans to concern yoursellf with. You have no problems connected with the vagaries that might well arise with some form of hijack. The explosives already in the building are primed and waiting, both towers have to be hit. You will most certainly plump for the Offutt remote control lift off and delivery over any other option.

If it was planned, then you would be correct. However it wasn't planned, there were no explosives or the sound of them would have been recorded. Since there is not a single recording of the hundreds of tons of explosives that would have been needed to not only bring the towers down, but pulverize the concrete since the "Truth Movement" claims that there was no other way for that to happen. I'm a bit late to this thread, but have you explained the complete lack of any audio recordings of the so-called explosives?

That is what happened and that is why the Israelis were dancing on the roof when the hits were made.

Oh, so they were going to "sacrifice" 2 of their own plus another 600 jews? Yeah right.

 

[SOMERLED]

No, it won't do at all. Your falsehood about pilotless airliners has been exposed.

You have yet to acknowledge that you were lying when you pretended that heavily armored Boeing airliners exist.

I refer you to post 2196.
Also, where is the falsehood about pilotless planes?
I don't tell lies, neither do I pretend.
The attack planes were altered, probably in the civil part of Offutt AFB and then sneaked into the air around about 3.45 am Central time, under the cover of darkness.
The excuse to get them airborne at that time, was the fact that the runways were closed to all but celebrities and their celebrity jets from dawn onwards.
This because of a celebrity golf tournament sheduled for 9/11.

 

[pomeroo]

1. What do you mean by "faith based"?

Your irrational hatred of America is a form of religious belief. It is completely unfalsifiable and requires you to stand reality on its head.

quote=malcolm kirkman;2734513]
2. All the evidence and logic points to an 'inside job'.

Mindlessly repeating a falsehood cannot make it true. NO evidence points to an inside job. OVERWHELMING evidence demonstrates that well-trained dedicated jihadists carried out on 9/11/01 the most spectacular of a decade-long series of attacks.

quote=malcolm kirkman;2734513]
I find it amazing that you can assert what you do, when you cannot produce one scintilla of evidence that the plane that hit the south tower was flight 175.

The rest of us find it amazing that you can dismiss so much evidence simply because it is inconvenient to the preposterous myths you peddle.

quote=malcolm kirkman;2734513]
I have shown you countless examples of controlled demolition, you slide by any logical explanation of the evidence I put up and then make such claims?

You are completely ignorant on the subject of demolition. Your examples are rubbish. There is a reason why not a single demolition expert IN THE WORLD takes seriously the fantasists' fabrications about explosives in the Twin Towers.

quote=malcolm kirkman;2734513]
It is you and other posters on here who demonstrates an ability to ignore critical thinking skills.

Produce a demolition expert who swallows your snake oil. Show us actual errors in the NIST Report. Admit that you lied when you stated that Raytheon conducted pilotless test flights. Acknowledge that your imaginary "bad boys," heavily-armored Boeing airliners, do not exist. Display a minimal ability to discard some of the thoroughly debunked nonsense that clutters your mind. Persuade us, at long last, that you are capable of learning something.

 

[pomeroo]

I will be pleased to correct the numerous mistakes in this very poor hit piece, just as soon as you answer the questions raised in the piece I posted.

As you refuse, for obvious reasons, to come to terms with Apathoid's refutation of your uninformed hokum about remote-controlled flight, try addressing this short article:

http://911myths.com/html/remote_control.html

 

[SOMERLED]

However, if it was remote controlled or homed in, there would not have been the erratic maneuvers the airplane did right before it hit. The plane would have been wings level and not in a bank. The same goes for a military pilot.

If it was planned, then you would be correct. However it wasn't planned, there were no explosives or the sound of them would have been recorded. Since there is not a single recording of the hundreds of tons of explosives that would have been needed to not only bring the towers down, but pulverize the concrete since the "Truth Movement" claims that there was no other way for that to happen. I'm a bit late to this thread, but have you explained the complete lack of any audio recordings of the so-called explosives?

Oh, so they were going to "sacrifice" 2 of their own plus another 600 jews? Yeah right.

1. Why would there necessarily be no 'erratic' movement?
2. There are not only thousands of recordings of explosions, but also seismic records of the ground level explosions that blew the bases away, prior to the cores being brought down.
Here is a small selection,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V_DDi1wq1Bc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8n-nT-luFIw
3. I said Israelis not jews. What 600 are you referring to?

 

[lapman]

I will be pleased to correct the numerous mistakes in this very poor hit piece, just as soon as you answer the questions raised in the piece I posted.

Ok, let's start with the Jowenko video. He only sees the last 6 seconds, without sound and is only told that there were fires in the building. He had no knowledge of the extensive damage that was done to it by the WTC1 collapse. In the side by side, the controlled demo fell faster than WTC7 and the WTC7 portion did not show the complete collapse which includes the roof caving in. Of course in his critique of the tower collapse sequences of "Loose Change" he goes into great detail of how the towers collapsed, the "squibs" and says that it is impossible to bring the towers down that way with explosives.

On this quote:

Police is heard clearing the area because "the building is about to blow up."

Blowing up and imploded or demolished are very different things. No mention of "fire in the hole," "explosives being detonated" or anything else that would be associated with a controlled demo. Of course the mention the "Pull It" quote. Of course, "Pull it" and implosions are not interchangeable. Never have been and never will be.
I love this quote:

The debunkers' statement that "there is no video actually confirming the sound of explosions" is confuted by the very clip [ending with "Seven is exploding"] you saw above

That video snippet was shot sometime between the towers and 7 collapse. So, it was some sort of delayed echo that bounced all around the city and then returned? How that sound is related to the towers is beyond me unless they found a way to bend time and space.

 

[Hyperviolet]

You could always stick a banger in the middle of the burger and light it.
Then, when the banger went off, you would have your own mini WTC attack.

Well, aside from the fact that a banger isn't a jet nor the burger a skyscraper.. then yeah you could.

 

[pomeroo]

I refer you to post 2196.

Referring us back to a post that confirms your irrationailty won't help you to dupe anyone.

Also, where is the falsehood about pilotless planes?

The falsehood consists in your refusal to acknowledge corrections to the fabrications you peddle. The Raytheon tests you allude to did NOT involve flying pilotless commercial airliners.

I don't tell lies, neither do I pretend.

Demonstrably false. You lied when you pretended that heavily-armored airliners, "military bad boys," actually exist. They do not, and your error has been pointed out to you repeatedly. Your refusal to acknowledge it is highly dishonest.

The attack planes were altered, probably in the civil part of Offutt AFB and then sneaked into the air around about 3.45 am Central time, under the cover of darkness.
The excuse to get them airborne at that time, was the fact that the runways were closed to all but celebrities and their celebrity jets from dawn onwards.
This because of a celebrity golf tournament sheduled for 9/11.

You are lying. There is not a "scintilla" of truth to your fantastic scenario. You are not making an honest mistake, Instead, you are drawing from your deep reservoir of hatred for America to concoct this absurd scenario. You have invented this far-fetched nonsense out of whole cloth. The planes used by the jihadists in their attacks were commercial airliners that they hijacked. Offutt AFB played absolutely no role whatever in the events of 9/11/01. Your fixation on an irrelevant celebrity golf tournament is as bizarre as it is pointless.

 

[lapman]

1. Why would there necessarily be no 'erratic' movement?

It's called extensive training of the pilots and if it was automated, then definitely no erratic movement since it would have been too difficult to program that.

2. There are not only thousands of recordings of explosions, but also seismic records of the ground level explosions that blew the bases away, prior to the cores being brought down.
Here is a small selection,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V_DDi1wq1Bc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8n-nT-luFIw

False statement. I've seen the "analysis" of the first video. The sound is traveling 1.8 miles and against the wind in less than a second. That makes it a phony. The second one only has the sound of something happening sometime after the tower collapses and the WTC7 collapse. Not proof at all.
So, point out the explosion in this video. Or this one.

3. I said Israelis not jews. What 600 are you referring to?

Ok, I sit corrected, it was around 400.

Your turn.