• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Ed All 43 videos "Second Hit"" [Explosion]at WTC 2: Plane or No Plane?

Status
Not open for further replies.
So..what happened to you being just a lurker, Jam? Miss the attention?

No, it was not so much that. To be candid with you, I have come to understand that posts and other actions that seek to either derail the NO PLANE evidence or otherwise adversly affect posting of NO PLANE data, need to be countered and not acquiesced in.

So, I will post on occasion, just not as frequently. There is much to said for being in the lurker group. :p

Thanks again for your post # 718, that was thoughtful of you.

all the best
 
No, it was not so much that. To be candid with you, I have come to understand that posts and other actions that seek to either derail the NO PLANE evidence or otherwise adversly affect posting of NO PLANE data, need to be countered and not acquiesced in.

So, I will post on occasion, just not as frequently. There is much to said for being in the lurker group. :p

Thanks again for your post # 718, that was thoughtful of you.

all the best

A group of one,no other lurker shares your delusion.
 
I have no trouble with it at all; all as was analyzed in great detail over the 60+ pages of the Dick Oliver threads. On the other hand, one might well ask you "what part of "at first I thought it was an airplane" YOU have trouble with.

Further, if you are having trouble, then merely consider what all else Dick Oliver said. That is the rational way to analyze witness statements.

Of course I know fully well what else Dick Oliver said.

I also know fully well what else Jim Ryan said when he saw 175 crash with his own eyes.

And I know fully well what else was reported by PAPD officers who were there.

So if you have to take into consideration what Dick Oliver said in it's entirety, then you must consider everyone else too.

YOU DO NOT GET TO HAVE IT BOTH WAYS.
 
Last edited:
Reported. Rule 6.

.

I have him on ignore. It's a burden but I imagine I shall survive.

The sound of the lowflying aircraft made the cameraman pan up and he caught the ensuing fireball from the impacting aircraft high up on the building along with the impact sounds.
The sounds of the lowflying aircraft were no longer on the video soundtrack after the impact.
 
"I saw both planes hit. I would commute from NJ. Sometimes I'd take the PATH train from Hoboken, on nice days I'd take the ferry. 9/11 was a beautiful morning, and I took the ferry. I got off the ferry at the World financial center and began walking to my office on 45 Broadway. To do this, you have to walk DIRECTLY toward WTC1 As I was walking I heard a jets roar. I looked up. Now [feel free to delete this if it will make CT’ers take it out of context] I expected it to me some sort of military plane since every now and then military jets do fly down the Hudson river. IT WAS NOT. I saw a huge jetliner fly over me and SLAM IN TO THE TOWER! I had a PERFECT vantage point."

Deal with that.
 
The Lurker Group is a nice place to be, see ya next page.

19
http://i1008.photobucket.com/albums...le/19-grayblurry434bentplane.png?t=1275516933

This one is gray, blurry and features an unsual looking shadow thingy. It is narrower than many and has other oddities that posters and lurkers can either discern, ignore or rationalize as they see fit to do.

One consistency this one has with most is that there is no discernible jetliner sound, despite being able to hear voices clearly and background noises as well as the sound of a, you guessed it, explosion. That and nothing more.

This one runs about 12 seconds.

ALL 43
 
Jammonius;
Your 43 Videos only prove one thing for sure. You have no idea of how different video cameras work, and you have less knowledge of how various types of microphones work.
 
19
http://i1008.photobucket.com/albums...le/19-grayblurry434bentplane.png?t=1275516933

This one is gray, blurry and features an unsual looking shadow thingy. It is narrower than many and has other oddities that posters and lurkers can either discern, ignore or rationalize as they see fit to do.

One consistency this one has with most is that there is no discernible jetliner sound, despite being able to hear voices clearly and background noises as well as the sound of a, you guessed it, explosion. That and nothing more.

This one runs about 12 seconds.

ALL 43

I know you're not coming back, but what exactly is this supposed to prove?

This is not to let you other Truthers off the hook. For those out there reading this, thermite is no less whacky than no-planes and dustifying ray guns. Just because it fools the kids in the lunch room doesn't mean that anyone who knows about science thinks it's somehow less scifi.

Jammi was right when he was going on about how it doesn't matter what others think. If you think any of this no-plane, thermite paint crap could convince anyone, that would explain why there's only a couple of dozen loonies out every year for the 911 Truth protests.
 
How I see no planers:



Swatting at invisible enemies with imaginary weapons...
 
. . .Swatting at invisible enemies with imaginary weapons...
Which, just to bump it by cannibalizing some of my two-year-old posts, have long ago been quantitatively demonstrated by four separate posters to be impossible:

R. Mackey looked at the problems with such a device being in orbit, and looked at the beam energy and energy storage necessary to deliver approximately twice the kinetic energy delivered by one of the hijacked aircraft. He then went on to look at launch and other problems with this scenario. In every case, he showed clearly why it was unfeasible.

Myriad looked specifically at the energy needed to literally "dustify" the Towers, based on his own experimental data - thus earning him membership in the Jr. Crazy Chainsaw Fan Club. No wiggle room here - this was actual dustification.

BenBurch used the physics of the atmosphere and terrestrial magnetic field, as well as the physics of beam generation, and limited the possible invisible-magic-death-ray choices to a narrow range in the infrared; he also specified various show-stopping problems with each possible type of beam. His approach rather elegantly addressed (and answered) the most fundamental aspect of the DEW scenario: what kind of weapon was it? In other words, he did all of jammonius' work for him, in explicit detail, and poor jammonius still couldn't answer the question!

And finally my analysis, which looked at the nature of the material jammonius claimed was destroyed, the claim that the buildings were "pulverized, turned to dust and utterly destroyed" - in itself directly rebutted by the recovery of the vast majority of the WTC steel - and the ~10 second time frame in which jammonius claimed this happened. And showed just how impossible it was for anything like the ABL, a picture of which jammonius was so fond of showing, to have done it.

That's a lot of work for people to do for someone who literally doesn't know what he's talking about, and has repeatedly demonstrated it by his complete inability to even define his claim. But that's what happens when one is only parroting poor, mad Judy Wood.
 
Last edited:
I don't know about you, but I think Poor Mad Judy Wood would be a KILLER name for a rock band.
 
So, just where was the beam of this “dustification” type of weapon launched from? Was it from the Hudson River, a tall building in New Jersey, from the air, or maybe from outer space?

Well, because these types of weapons are of the “line of sight” variety, the Hudson River and the tall buildings remove themselves from the picture.

Could it have been launched from some huge aircraft flying in the vicinity of NYC? Well, now that I think of it, no such aircraft showed up on any radar screen. So much for that idea, eh?

Well, how about outer space? There are no known space vehicles in outer space that would be capable of launching a DEW type weapon. Especially one that could launch a weapon with the power that would be required to cause the damage suffered by the towers.

Not to mention the fact that the use of such a weapon would have raised holy hell with commercial broadcasts in the area.

OK folks; help me out here, will you? What? None of you are DEW (Dustifying Energy Weapons) experts! Damn! Jammonius, where are you Buddy. Help me out here will ya?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom