Merged 9/11 CT subforum General Discussion Thread
- Thread starter T.A.M.
- Start date
- Status
BigAl
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2007
- Messages
- 5,397
Nobody heard any high explosives explode when the planes hit the towers. In the 1993 WTC bombing, 1,000 pounds of high explosive was heard by everyone for blocks around. Nobody heard anything like that on 9/11.
The planes hit the towers with the energy equal to about a ton of TNT.
How much TNT would it take to do significantly more damage and how was that quantity sneaked on the plane without the pilot and ground crew knowing igen that loads and center of gravity are critical to the plane being above to fly safely?
BigAl
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2007
- Messages
- 5,397
Because she knew there was a second plane, she just didn't see it herself.
BigAl
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2007
- Messages
- 5,397
Not every fact is on YouTube or a transcript.
There is nothing unusual for one individual to not mention a plane when everyone knew there were two p[lanes.
BigAl
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2007
- Messages
- 5,397
You are gullible and ignorant of the body of evidence from 9/11 and insufficiently skeptical of claims made by a class of people that lie. This would be people that use the word, "truth", much too much. There is a reason why no eyewitnesses and no New Yorkers I know of have joined the "Truth Movement". This is a good example of why.
New Yorkers know that that Chelsea is NORTH of WTC and Flight 11 hit the SOUTH side of WTC. There is no way she could have seen the plane.
A fact-based video would point that out. Nothing with the words 9/11 and "Truth" is fact-based.
240-185
Muse
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2008
- Messages
- 510
240,
The longer answer is that there are lots of PROOFS that explosives were NOT a component of the blast that occurred. If they had happened, there would have been a VERY EASILY seen high velocity pressure wave move thru the fireball. You can see this happen when the "Red Adair" type groups extinguish oil well fires. There is actually a (small) chance that it would have actually extinguished the flame.
But the short answer is "No, there is nothing that you can do to convince anyone who 'declares' something to be true with zero evidence."
You'll see that here frequently.
An honest person ASKS if something might be true. And then starts gathering evidence both pro & con to the question. And an honest person honors both the pro & con evidence, giving the evidence appropriate "weights". (Note that one unequivocal, falsifying piece of hard evidence trumps hundreds of suggestive pieces of counter-evidence.)
Anyone who declares something to be true without evidence, based only on their hunch or belief, and then puts the burden on you to disprove it is clearly not intellectually honest. Specifically, s/he is biased and will only honor evidence that favors their predetermined side of the issue.
Happens here all the time.
And your efforts to dissuade are doomed to failure.
Sorry to be the bearer of bad news. The good news is that, unless that person is your significant other, then it ain't your problem.
tom
The longer answer is that there are lots of PROOFS that explosives were NOT a component of the blast that occurred. If they had happened, there would have been a VERY EASILY seen high velocity pressure wave move thru the fireball. You can see this happen when the "Red Adair" type groups extinguish oil well fires. There is actually a (small) chance that it would have actually extinguished the flame.
But the short answer is "No, there is nothing that you can do to convince anyone who 'declares' something to be true with zero evidence."
You'll see that here frequently.
An honest person ASKS if something might be true. And then starts gathering evidence both pro & con to the question. And an honest person honors both the pro & con evidence, giving the evidence appropriate "weights". (Note that one unequivocal, falsifying piece of hard evidence trumps hundreds of suggestive pieces of counter-evidence.)
Anyone who declares something to be true without evidence, based only on their hunch or belief, and then puts the burden on you to disprove it is clearly not intellectually honest. Specifically, s/he is biased and will only honor evidence that favors their predetermined side of the issue.
Happens here all the time.
And your efforts to dissuade are doomed to failure.
Sorry to be the bearer of bad news. The good news is that, unless that person is your significant other, then it ain't your problem.
tom
Another one is the lack of widespread injuries from glass shrapnel, which demolition charges going off with the glass windows still in place would have caused. Many of the people seen on video staggering out of the dust cloud would have been riddled with glass shards (or dead on the streets well beyond the radius where heavy debris fell) if explosive demolition had occurred. (In actual explosive demolitions, of course, all the glass is always removed first.)
Respectfully,
Myriad
240-185
Muse
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2008
- Messages
- 510
Thanks for your precisions, tfk. I guess you're right.
From an other part, just to check:
(Another twoofer who brought me that list after I pointed him to this famous thread).
From an other part, just to check:
None of these firefighters or medical staff support the twoof movement, do they?
(Another twoofer who brought me that list after I pointed him to this famous thread).
There is absolutely nothing surprising here.
It takes time for sound to travel.
No one who was not looking in the right direction would have seen the first plane hit. The thing that got the Naudet brothers to point the camera in the right direction was the sound of the plane passing overhead. Luckily, the camera happened to be already rolling.
Very few people saw the first plane hit. Lots of people heard the impact & fireball - about 1 - 2 seconds after it happened. Since it took the sound a full second to reach the ground.
For anyone who was 3 miles away and not looking right at the towers, the crash & initial fireball would be heard about 16 seconds after the impact. So they would simply have "heard an explosion", turned & looked at the towers, seen fire & smoke pouring out, and very reasonably connected the two events.
During the next 15 minutes, there were LOTS of reports given to the media by people who DID see the plane hit that "a plane hit the North Tower". That info went out on all the news channels. You could see the silhouette of a plane in the side of the building. So the woman was fully aware that the first impact was from a plane.
I disagree that she would have necessarily been unable to see the second plane because she lived in Chelsea. It depends on where the plane was, and where she was. There is a very narrow three dimensional wedge that emanates from this person's location within which the plane would have been invisible behind the towers. When the plane was outside of this wedge (laterally or vertically), it would have been VERY visible. In fact, since it was flying directly at her, it would have appeared to be moving very slowly and easy to pick up.
Chelsea is about 3 miles north of the towers. At that distance the horizontal wedge would be about tan-1((2* 208) / (3*5280) = 1.5°. The vertical wedge would be tan-1(1100/3*5280) = 4° (max) if she was at ground level, and much less if she was in a tall building. These are very small obscured angles.
So I think that it is very likely (virtually certain) that she saw the second plane. There have been lots of videos broadcast from this approximate location that show the plane's approach just fine.
I think that, if she did not see the plane, she would have said "there was just another explosion". I think the fact that she said "another plane" is sufficient proof that she DID see the second plane, either beside or above the towers, as it approached, and the timing of the explosion matched the convergence of the plane on the tower. She was observant. She was smart. She was right.
Boy, now THERE'S another big mystery. Just like "Harley Davidson Guy". How could anyone have possibly come to the rapid conclusion that structural damage & heat might be the cause the collapse of a building that was massively damaged & on fire??
You must be right. They are clearly "government planted shills". In fact, I bet that everyone in Manhattan that day was a "gov't disinfo agent". I mean, we put a man on the moon. How hard could it be to stock Manhattan with 500,000 mindless drones?
You start with "pods by their beds when they go to sleep..."
And you, bill, are again trolling for trivia, and attempting to turn insignificant nonsense into issues. A pure waste of time & effort.
bill smith
Philosopher
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2009
- Messages
- 8,408
Biographical note; Theresa Renaud is the wife of CBS Early Show producer Jack Renaud, who is a vice president at Deutsch Advertising in Chelsea.
This next video is worth watching from start to finish.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=GB&hl=en-GB&v=18HqbZf440w&NR=1
bill smith
Philosopher
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2009
- Messages
- 8,408
Somewhere around the middle of the World Trade Center, there was this orange and red flash coming out. Initially it was just one flash. Then this flash just kept popping all the way around the building and that building had started to explode. The popping sound, and with each popping sound it was initially an orange and then a red flash came out of the building and then it would just go all around the building on both sides as far as I could see. These popping sounds and the explosions were getting bigger, going both up and down and then all around the building.
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110192.PDF New York Times
Stephen Gregory -- Assistant Commissioner (F.D.N.Y.) We both for whatever reason -- again, I don't know how valid this is with everything that was going on at that particular point in time, but for some reason I thought that when I looked in the direction of the Trade Center before it came down, before No. 2 came down, that I saw low-level flashes. In my conversation with Lieutenant Evangelista, never mentioning this to him, he questioned me and asked me if I saw low-level flashes in front of the building, and I agreed with him because I thought -- at that time I didn't know what it was. I mean, it could have been as a result of the building collapsing, things exploding, but I saw a flash flash flash and then it looked like the building came down.
...
[It was at] the lower level of the building. You know like when they demolish a building, how when they blow up a building, when it falls down? That's what I thought I saw.
...
He said did you see anything by the building? And I said what do you mean by see anything? He said did you see flashes? I said, yes, well, I thought it was just me. He said no, I saw them too.
...
I know about the explosion on the upper floors. This was like at eye level. I didn't have to go like this. Because I was looking this way. I'm not going to say it was on the first floor or the second floor, but somewhere in that area I saw to me what appeared to be flashes.
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110008.PDF New York Times
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/oralhistories/explosions.html
Journalist Pete Hamill:“We heard snapping sounds, pops, little explosions, and then the walls bulged out, and we heard a sound like an avalanche.”[New York Daily News, 9/11/2001]
Firefighter Keith Murphy, who is in the lobby of the North Tower:“[T]he first thing that happened, which I still think is strange to me, the lights went out.… I had heard right before the lights went out, I had heard a distant boom boom boom, sounded like three explosions.… At the time, I would have said they sounded like bombs, but it was boom boom boom and then the lights all go out.… I would say about 3, 4 seconds, all of a sudden this tremendous roar.”[City of New York, 12/5/2001]
Firefighter Craig Carlsen hears “explosions coming from building two, the South Tower. It seemed like it took forever, but there were about ten explosions.… We then realized the building started to come down.”[City of New York, 1/25/2002
Firefighter Thomas Turilli, who is in the lobby of the North Tower:“[A]ll of a sudden you just heard like it almost actually that day sounded like bombs going off, like boom, boom, boom, like seven or eight, and then just a huge wind gust just came… It just seemed like a huge explosion.”[City of New York, 1/17/2002]
Paramedic Kevin Darnowski:“I heard three explosions, and then we heard like groaning and grinding, and Tower Two started to come down.”[City of New York, 11/9/2001]
Police officer Sue Keane, who is an Army veteran, is located in the north WTC tower:“t sounded like bombs going off. That’s when the explosions happened.… It started to get dark, then all of a sudden there was this massive explosion.”[Hagen and Carouba, 2002, pp. 65]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZ4dVo5QgYg Firemen's Testimony- Study
BigAl
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2007
- Messages
- 5,397
You've been listening to people that lie.
If the video has a explosive sound, it was fake or some how otherwise irrelevant to the cause of the collapse of the towers.
Nobody heard any explosions consistent with man-made demolition at WTC.
All the names, below are cherry-picked quotes picked by liars. None of the firemen think that man-made demolition brought the towers down.
Last edited:
bill smith
Philosopher
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2009
- Messages
- 8,408
You can deny it for a long time if you want Al. But you WILL go thrugh your own dark night of the soul at some point. You should just face up to it now. Watch the video at the end of that post of mine.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZ4dVo5QgYg Firemen's Testimony- Study
Last edited:
BigAl
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2007
- Messages
- 5,397
You listen to people that lie by cherrypicking.
Lots of people I know saw WTC up close and for real. Nobody heard sounds loud enough and timed to be man-made demolition.
A blast of 1,000 pounds of TNT in 1993 wasn't large enough to do any immediate structural damage yet it was heard for a quarter mile around.
There were lots of loud noises heard on 9/11 and "explosion" is a good word for "loud noise". No noise reported by only one person is loud enough to be a demolition explosion.
bill smith
Philosopher
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2009
- Messages
- 8,408
It's all the same to me whether you choose to believe in no conspiracy on 9/11 Al. Like FOX, I just report- you decide.
Last edited:
six7s
veretic
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2007
- Messages
- 8,716
bill smith
Philosopher
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2009
- Messages
- 8,408
Hey Al.....see his piece that I cherrypicked out of what I posted earlier ? ;-
''Firefighter Keith Murphy, who is in the lobby of the North Tower:“[T]he first thing that happened, which I still think is strange to me, the lights went out.… I had heard right before the lights went out, I had heard a distant boom boom boom, sounded like three explosions.… At the time, I would have said they sounded like bombs, but it was boom boom boom and then the lights all go out.… I would say about 3, 4 seconds, all of a sudden this tremendous roar''[City of New York, 12/5/2001]
You have to remember hat these reports were mostly all given on or close to 9/11. Of course they would never have expected bombs to be in the buildings on 9/11. They thought it was only the planes. If the situation had been a little different I feel certain that the bomb reports would have multiplied vastly.
Last edited:
BigAl
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2007
- Messages
- 5,397
Every ellipsis in a Twoofer document contains a lie.
An ellipses is the "..." and a Twoofer has omitted information that he doesn't want you to know because it weakens or contradicts Twoofer claims that something other than fire caused the towers to collapse. There are hundreds of them in alleged "peer reviewed" Twoofer papers documents.
In true lying Twoofer form, the Twoofer didn't give you a link to the original text so you could fact-check for yourself.
In this case, the "..." is a substitution for " SINCE WE WERE IN THAT CORE LITTLE AREA OF THE BUILDING THERE WAS NO NATURAL LIGHT NO NOTHING DIDNT SEE THING"
So he was in a dark room in the North tower when the South tower collapsed.
He didn't know what was going on because the radios were useless. IMO the radios were the real crime of 9/11. Most or all the firemen would be alive if the city had bought radios that worked in the towers. If Twoofers marched to get prosecution for the people that bought the radios, I might join them.
Murphy doesn't think that man-made demolition caused the towers to collapsed.
Lots of fireman quotes cherrypicked by people that use the word, "Truth" much too much are from firemen in the North tower who didn't know what was happening when the other tower collapsed. I'm surprised these people don't have hearing damage for all the loud noises they heard.
Nobody heard anything consistent with man-made demolition.
Last edited:
- Status