Split Thread 'Nose-out' footage

[triforcharity]

Well I hope you are this convincing on coast-to-coast TV.

It wouldn't be that hard. Do you have a linkey to their show?? I would love to see that epic failure.

 

[gumboot]

There's something particularly special about a Conspiracy Theorists who is willing to argue directly with an eyewitness about what they did and did not see.

Special in all the wrong ways.

 

[triforcharity]

Yeah, special in thata "short bus to school" kind of way.

And the thing is, I usually post lots of pictures to prove what I am talking about, and links to different studies that have been done.

And yet, they still don't understand.

 

[bardamu]

Why do you say that?

He's an actor reading from a script.

Do you think there is a case to be made for the no-planes theory having been deliberately planted by the government ?

Planes would have to have hit the towers, so there's no case at all.

This is a joke, right? There are hundreds of high-quality videos and pictures of the holes. What you are saying is that no matter HOW many there were, all you have to do is say that YOU think there's not enough and BAM! It's evidence of conspiracy. LOL

Please link to a hi-res image of either of the holes.

You do know there are more than a few qualified scientists and engineers who are absolutely certain the buildings COULD have totally collapsed due to fires (and damage, which you always leave out), right?

I've listened to both sides of the argument and my informed judgement is that these scientists and engineers haven't looked into it and are simply relying on the opinions of other scientists and engineers who are lying.

So someone near Bowling Green Station (south of WTC) didn't see the plane coming in from the north, but did see the plane coming in from the south? Oh wow, that's so suspicious.

It's not suspicious at all. That's probably why her script was written that way.

Bump for bard. Please answer the questions and provide citations.

I've seen videos showing three corners falling in unison, so we can assume the other is doing the same, unless of course you can prove otherwise.

I don't think I've said anything about ruptured eardrums.

If these pictures go out on coast-to-coast TV you can take my word for it that only people like you will believe NIST.

http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/8607/wtc7controlleddemolitiohq3.jpg WTC7 Before
http://www.thewebfairy.com/killtown/images/wtc-gallery/wtc-rescuer/wtc7-1.JPG WTC7 6 seconds later

Now that's what I call "in its own footprint"!

I can't upload the other one I have.

ETA Here it is

http://i63.photobucket.com/albums/h131/triathlete247/bankers.jpg
http://i63.photobucket.com/albums/h131/triathlete247/abankers.jpg

How did those columns and spandrels get there?

A more rational question to you Bill is, as a plan, why would faking the video and destroying the trade towers deliberatly (creating a greater chance of being discovered) be a more logical approach than planes crashing into buildings?

Crashing planes into buildings is illogical.

 

[bardamu]

First of all, you don't even have that correct: None of the buildings collapsed due to the fires alone. Two of them suffered severe impact damage. And all three had elements of their design that rendered them susceptible to collapsing under the circumstances that occurred that day. But that's a little ahead of where you're currently at with your level of knowledge. Let's concentrate on those "qualified architects" you want to cite. Just go for it: Name them and present their arguments. Don't worry about what their authority is supposed to be, put forth what they come out say. Just don't forget to actually present their arguments too. And while we're at it, let's see if you understand them yourself (given what you just wrote, I doubt it, but we'll see). Too many of you truthers even screw up conspiratorial arguments, nevermind missing the boat on what actually happened.

But be forwarned: If you're thinking of Richard Gage and folks in AE911T, you'd better check this forum's archives. All those folks have been doing is forwarding the same old explosives/thermite BS that's been refuted for years now. If you really think those arguments are compelling, you've got some remedial reading to do.

But don't be scared. Give the names and arguments. See if you can make what they say stick. So far, you truthers are batting 0.000 on this.

And as far as Dunning–Kruger effect: Yes, I was aiming that at truthers like Gage who have zero tall building experience and also do not recognize the errors and fallacies involved in their arguments. But make no mistake: I was also aiming it at the likes of you, who's utterly representative of so many who believe they understand the event of the day, only to demonstrate that all they know are misrepresentations and distortions of facts instead of actual truth. Yes, that's aimed at all of you. You've all earned it many times over.

This is getting a bit off topic, but your challenge is so easy I can't resist taking it up. Richard Gage often pretends to hold a brick up in each hand and ask which one would hit the ground first if he dropped them at the same time: the one supported by tons of structural steel or the one with nothing but fresh air underneath? Everybody knows that the one with no resistance to overcome will fall the fastest, yet in one video I saw, a JREFer who was trying to debunk him said he couldn't say for sure because he was only a history teacher and didn't know anything about physics. This seems to be the exact opposite of the Dunning-Kruger effect, where some people are happy to give their minds away and let government-appointed experts do most of their thinking for them.

 

[funk de fino]

No planers are pond life who cannot function in real life.

There are videos of people reacting to the second plane flying past and then it ploughs into the Tower. How does a hologram make people look round and watch it fly past? Sound of the screaming engines and all?

 

[bill smith]

This is getting a bit off topic, but your challenge is so easy I can't resist taking it up. Richard Gage often pretends to hold a brick up in each hand and ask which one would hit the ground first if he dropped them at the same time: the one supported by tons of structural steel or the one with nothing but fresh air underneath? Everybody knows that the one with no resistance to overcome will fall the fastest, yet in one video I saw, a JREFer who was trying to debunk him said he couldn't say for sure because he was only a history teacher and didn't know anything about physics. This seems to be the exact opposite of the Dunning-Kruger effect, where some people are happy to give their minds away and let government-appointed experts do most of their thinking for them.

That was even the jref debunking director who said that I belive. Thank you. I will copy this to dissolve future Dunning-Kruger mentions.

 

[bill smith]

No planers are pond life who cannot function in real life.

There are videos of people reacting to the second plane flying past and then it ploughs into the Tower. How does a hologram make people look round and watch it fly past? Sound of the screaming engines and all?

Do you have the videos to prove it ?

 

[Algebra34]

No, there is not.
Delusional, paranoid people like Nico Haupt and killtown associate themselves with that one.

A more rational question to you Bill is, as a plan, why would faking the video and destroying the trade towers deliberatly (creating a greater chance of being discovered) be a more logical approach than planes crashing into buildings?

I've thought about this. That's why I can't get behind LIHOP only. If there was a conspiracy to even just let this happen how could the powers that be have confidence the hijackers could pull it off by just standing out of their way? There was a lot riding on this. There was a whole agenda on the cooker for a long time. Would they just want to leave it all to chance like in 93? What if it wasn't as big of a disaster? Would it be enough to kick off the war? It had to be big. There was no room for failure.

Now fake video and no planes? I'm not really sure about that either. Especially two in one spot, though bardamu has pointed out no live coverage of the second strike on the building face that was hit. It just doesn't sound like a good plan to me. But who knows?

 

[fitzgibbon]

Crashing planes into buildings is illogical.

Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you for your entertainment......Captain OBVIOUSSSS!!!!

 

[bill smith]

He's an actor reading from a script.




Planes would have to have hit the towers, so there's no case at all.




Please link to a hi-res image of either of the holes.




I've listened to both sides of the argument and my informed judgement is that these scientists and engineers haven't looked into it and are simply relying on the opinions of other scientists and engineers who are lying.




It's not suspicious at all. That's probably why her script was written that way.




I've seen videos showing three corners falling in unison, so we can assume the other is doing the same, unless of course you can prove otherwise.

I don't think I've said anything about ruptured eardrums.




Now that's what I call "in its own footprint"!




How did those columns and spandrels get there?




Crashing planes into buildings is illogical.

bardamu make sure you and your fellow Patriots take hard copies of these photos of WTC7. They could disappear in the next round of purging. You know how it goes.

 

[bill smith]

At 5:16 in the first video a FOX reporter makes an outlandish report which kind of chimes with no-planes.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o7PncGkdFPI

If you listen to Jennifer Oberstein in this next video....why....I get the feeling that they may have had the same acting coach....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3cpHxbIIV4

 

[funk de fino]

Do you have the videos to prove it ?

Why, yes I do. So does youtube. You seem to be the expert at spamming with youtube videos I am surprised you have not seen it.

 

[bill smith]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o7PncGkdFPI

Listen to this video very carefully at 00:49. Do you hear the guy saying ' Oh my God, a plane just crashed into the World Trade Center, I can hardly believe it ' Realistic eh ? But I've heard his voice on another 9/11 video somewhere. If anybody hears it let me know.....

 

[MIKILLINI]

Crashing planes into buildings is illogical.

Depends on who's flying the planes.

I'll give you something really illogical: A theory of top down controlled demolition on 1300 ft. structures while nobody notices the wiring technicians, the explosive technicians, the amount of explosives brought in, the fabrication to structural key areas of the building to place the explosive charges, faking video, making 4 airliners from 2 different companies, and each ones passengers, disappear (presumably) from the face of the earth.

 

[bill smith]

Now you sound like he chopper 5 pilot who also said something about 3,000 people vanishing from the face of the Earth. I was thinking more '9/11 Island'.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYnMiN7teho Jeff/Chopper 5

 

[Mancman]

It's not suspicious at all. That's probably why her script was written that way.

So the fact her account make sense is evidence it was faked.

 

[BigAl]

Now you sound like he chopper 5 pilot who also said something about 3,000 people vanishing from the face of the Earth. Iwas thinking more '9/11 Island'.

Bill really needs to take a refresher course on whatever section it is that teaches metaphor.

 

[triforcharity]

Now that's what I call "in its own footprint"!

Than obviously you still have no idea what the word footprint means.
Please Google for the meaning of the word, it will help you understand WHY you're wrong.

How did those columns and spandrels get there?

Gravity. Again, if you understood the word "footprint" you would understand.

Crashing planes into buildings is illogical.

How's that? Their goal was to kill as many Americans as they possibly could, in the most effecient manner. They have accomplished that. Now they are getting ******* in Hell by Satan and Hitler.

It worked. They killed many Americans, and they became martyers.

 

[TruthersLie]

I've listened to both sides of the argument and my informed judgement is that these scientists and engineers haven't looked into it and are simply relying on the opinions of other scientists and engineers who are lying.

Unlike twoofer architects and engineers who can't even agree on what happened?

They have "looked" into it, and we have
1. mini nukes
2. no planes
3. Dew
4. Thermite
5. Nanothermite
6. HAARP
7. Explosive demolitions

can't forget the pentagon
1. a missle
2. a global hawk
3. An a 4
4. an explosion (no jet)
5. NOC
6. a flyover

and then there is shanksville
1. no jet crashed ther
2. a jet was shotdown
3. flight 93 landed in cleveland.

It would help if your "experts" could even agree on what to have for lunch, and then try to present a complete (even partially complete) example of what they think happened.

I've seen videos showing three corners falling in unison, so we can assume the other is doing the same, unless of course you can prove otherwise.

Ah.... You do know what happens when you ASSUME, right? You make an ASS out of U and ME. Sorry. Assuming is not an option. You are making the claim taht all 4 corners fall symmetrically and uniformly. You have stated you have seen video of ALL 4 corners falling. Please provide the video.

From the ground shot that shows the collapse of the Eastern Mechanical penthouse, you can see through the windows on the top floor to the sky. To me that shows that the corner where the eastern mechanical penthouse was is no longer there or severely compromised. I can then infer (which is NOT going to make an ASS out of U and MPTION), that the corner there is either gone, has collapsed or is collapsing. WELL BEFORE the rest of the building collapses.

That alone shows it is NOT SYMMETRICAL nor is it UNIFORM.

I don't think I've said anything about ruptured eardrums.

You most definately have. YOu said that a jet going at 500 mph at 1000 feet should have people in the ER with ruptured eardrums. I'll look up the exact post in just a minute.

But speaking of ruptured eardrums. If there were explosives used in the towers (you know the stuff that hurled debris hundreds of feet) there would be ruptured ear drums and massive hearing loss like at the OKC bombings. Yet no one went into NYC Er's on 9/11 with those injuries. Why is that?