• 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.
Originally Posted by DGM
Start reading Jammonius' post from the beginning (of his time here) like we have. Do you find his argument for DEW and "ground zero" being flat compelling? How about the "Plymouth hubcaps" and horse trailers at Shanksville?

No i wont.
Well that about sums up just what you are here for... don't it?
His postings here on this thread is all thats in dispute.
His postings aren't in dispute, its WHAT he is posting which are lies.
 
Jammy? got any evidence that all three videos are fake yet?

Jammy and his cousin, sts75, are having a get together trying to figure out how to get out of the big hole they have dug for themselves. No doubt they will return with more of their nonsense, but with no answers to the questions asked of them.
 
Good thing I am rational, and do not make absurd claims that it would have split ear drums:

http://www.makeitlouder.com/Decibel Level Chart.txt


you may wish to direct your attention to 172 decibels you will find the plane in question a 767, and it clearly states that this decibel level is at sea level.

eardrums split or burst between 190-195 as you can see on the chart only 50% percent of the time

Also, the jet came in over the water at 2/3 the speed of sound. The only people close enough to have experienced anything more than the sound of a jet in the distance were on the southern tip of Manhattan. But due to the speed of the jet and the fact that it hit the building immediately after clearing the water, there was no time to hear a sustained roar from its engines. Just a brief moment of jet roar a fraction of a second before it hits the building, as is well documented in several videos.


An example of the sound dynamics at work...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6M-lXM1D8ZI&feature=related
 
Also, the jet came in over the water at 2/3 the speed of sound. The only people close enough to have experienced anything more than the sound of a jet in the distance were on the southern tip of Manhattan. But due to the speed of the jet and the fact that it hit the building immediately after clearing the water, there was no time to hear a sustained roar from its engines. Just a brief moment of jet roar a fraction of a second before it hits the building, as is well documented in several videos.


An example of the sound dynamics at work...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6M-lXM1D8ZI&feature=related

The above is rationalization personified. It is a lame excuse for why no one heard and why no mic captured the sound of a jetliner <1000ft up @ 550mph and why no one had to be treated for damage to their ears.

It also directly contradicts the first-hand, eyewitness testimony of those witnesses who not only said they neither saw nor heard a jetliner, but that, what they did hear, sounded like something other than a plane.

Asst. Commissioner Stephen Gregory, for instance. Here is where his account can be found:

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110008.PDF

Here's what he said:

"Q. Did you see or hear the second plane before
it hit the World Trade Center?

A. I never actually saw the plane, but l heard
it. You could hear it coming in and then we heard the
explosion and you could hear the roar of the plane
coming in. At first I didn't realize it was a plane.
I thought it was like the roar of fire, like something
had just incinerated, like a gas tank or an oil tank.
It sounded like a tremendous roar and then you heard
boom and then there was a big fire, a lot of fire, a
big fireball. I never actually saw a plane hit the
building. I never saw that. I saw it on television,
but I never saw it while I was standing there."

pg21/25

No one had trouble hearing what actually happened; namely:

an explosion

Just as Asst. Commn. Stephen Gregory stated.

They saw an explosion. All are clear about that. They heard at most a roar, but not what they thought was a jetliner right above them at 550mph, something that, had it been there, would have been easily identifiable. As that is not the sound they describe having heard, it follows that their hearing was consistent with what they saw:

an explosion

Drum roll, ergo, that is what happened.
 
and yet another:




http://www.50hz.com/decibel.html


and this chart even includes a jet flyover at 1000ft



and again:


http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1983/1983 - 2320.html


this will show you that as technology advanced laws were in place to regulate the noise put out by the larger planes, for the protection of airport communities.

From personal experience, I work within a 3 mile radius of an airport, there are flyovers all the time, all day, you can still sit outside and hold a conversation with someone and understand at normal voice levels, despite the planes.

The capacity for rationalization and for excuse-making is virtually unlimited. Let us be clear in this discussion, shall we, djlunacee?

You are seeking to provide an excuse, a justification, for why next to no one reported hearing a jetliner as it approached the South Tower at 550 mph, <1000ft above Manhattan. That is your task.

It is not an easy one.

Jets are loud, noisy and disturbing to the environment. They are noticeable.

Over land and populated areas, they are restricted to a speed of 200knots, when they are at or below 10,000ft, so as to minimize the environmental impacts. Jets also are either designed to be as quiet as possible or outfitted with hush kits operative at low altitude and low speed, but ineffective, I think, at high speed.

I don't know whether you plan on an exhaustive attempt to justify why a jetliner at <1000ft@550mph could not be heard. That is a waste of time. Instead, the better approach is to recognize that the lack of sound is, well, a sound indicator that the common storyline is false.

Meanwhile, if you want to pursue the issue of "hush kits" and of speed limits and the like, try:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hush_kit

http://www.vnypart161.com/FAQ.cfm

As to the issue of jetliner speed limit of 200k at or below 10000ft.

"2. Speed restrictions of 250 knots do not apply to aircraft operating beyond 12 NM from the coastline within the U.S.?Flight Information Region, in offshore Class E airspace below 10,000 feet MSL. However, in airspace underlying a Class B airspace area designated for an airport, or in a VFR corridor designated through such as a Class B airspace area, pilots are expected to comply with the 200?knot speed limit specified in 14 CFR Section?91.117(c). (See 14 CFR Sections 91.117(c) and 91.703.)"

Source:

http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/atc/atc0507.html


good luck
 
Last edited:
No one had trouble hearing what actually happened; namely:

an explosion

Because a plane crashing into a building at 500 mph+ would sound like what?
 
If this is any indication of what's to come in the following week then all I can say is...


































Comedy gold Jerry! Comedy Gold!
 
Look, I will give you credit for providing us with an archival source of video. You then, with some prompting, posted up examples of what you thought were worthy video segments. Fine.

I then elaborated on what I thought the video showed.

besides your personal biased/goal-oriented observations, do you have any EVIDENCE that they are fakes?
 
Can i read their witness statements anywhere, as i agree there would be 1000s, and their statements would be interesting.

Jammonious has been asking for pages now for someone to supply some statements to back up the bluff and bluster, so where are they??.


Thousands can witness something without making a statement.........When did they ever ask EVERYONE who saw the planes to come forward and make a statement? There were tens of thousands watching what happened that morning and if there had been no planes surely one person would have come forward and said so.??????.....we have dozens of videos which quite clearly (well clearly to sane persons) show the planes, wreckage, DNA evidence, radar evidence all which point to there being planes.

It is the best documented air crash in history yet you morons pretend there was not even a plane:rolleyes:
 
how come no one doubts that B-25 crashed into the Empire State Building?

Some did, but they are in FEMA camps now. Notice their absence? Why do you think the modern Truther movement is in decline? Education? :D
 
I just realized that I have been arguing with two guys who say there were no planes at the WTC on 9-11. This is not a good sign. I must be reallllllly bored.
 
It's not a game. Answer the question.

Shouldn't a jet full of fuel explode when it crashes into a building? If it should, then there is no reason to find it unusual that people are describing explosions. So answer the question and quit playing games.

One more time jammy. You are claiming that people saying that there are explosions are making a claim that proves that there are no planes. That means we need to know what you think a plane crashing into a building would sound like. Any rational thinking human being knows it would sound like an explosion. Your refusal to answer the question is silly at best and dishonest at worst. So one more time, just so the "Lurkers" can see how dishonest you can be:



Shouldn't a jet full of fuel explode when it crashes into a building?
 
Did anyone see it hit the building? We know what Jammy could do with that statement.

Even more important, how many people DIDN'T see it hit the building? According to Jammonius, if somebody says he didn't see it, it didn't exist.
 
NO PLANE VISIBLE!!!!!

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

Clearly no plane and "some people thought it was a gas balloon bomb"

Wreckage clearly wheels from a Ford Taunus (1945)

Evidenz it was not a plane....

INSIDE JOBBIE!!!!
 
Last edited:
One more time jammy. You are claiming that people saying that there are explosions are making a claim that proves that there are no planes.



Shouldn't a jet full of fuel explode when it crashes into a building?

Jammy, while you are trying to dream up some word salad answer to the above question, answer this also; what would a DEW weapon sound like when it hit the building? What would it look like?
DEW weapons wouldn't be carrying +/-10,000 gal. of fuel which takes LEL/UEL limits out of the equation, so what exploded out of three sides of the building?
Where was this weapon launched from, and from what?
 
Over the last page or so, I have specifically engaged with the following posters who have either posted up information or sought to refute something I posted:

Thunder

See: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6037477&postcount=900
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6037688&postcount=914

Elmondo

See: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6037525&postcount=902

Djlunacee

See: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6038920&postcount=929

BillyRayValentine

See: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6038890&postcount=928

I have also responded to some posters on the issue of rhetoric, gotcha games and 20 questions, showing them exactly why their posts did not merit another kind of reply.

One reason for doing this at this point relates to the appearance of STS75, a breath of freshair in the forum.

Posters, when sts75 showed up, you folks appear to have gone into a real panic.

:D

Needless to say, I will continue to appeal to Lurkers to post up!

Come on Lurkers...:)

Panic, ROLFLMAO.Wetting ourselves laughing would be nearer the mark.Has the 9/11 sub-forum 7-day boycott started yet?
 
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