• 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.
Thunder said:
there are thousands of witnesses to the 2nd plane.

and they are rational enough to assume that no one would doubt such a thing.

no rational, logical, stable people doubt that 2 airplanes crashed into the WTC on 9-11.

now, you can doubt that they were commercial. you can suggest they were military. you can suggest they were UPS jets..or whatever.

but to suggest there were NO planes..at the WTC, is great evidence of being irrational, illogical, and unstable.

sorry.
Click to expand...

Lurkers,

It is to be noted that the net number of witnesses to jetliners hitting the WTC on 9/11 that you are linked to in the above post is:

-0-

And, no matter how many posts there might be, that number will not ever get much beyond that. True, there are some, but it is nowhere near 1000s or even 1000 or even 500. It might actually be fewer than 50 that are reliable. I, myself, know of about 20; and, as to all of those, the power of suggestion, motivation to be seen as being patriotic and the influence of teevee are clearly present and evident in virtually all of those witness claims.

On the other hand, those who say they saw and heard an explosion are verified on the basis of the statements being spontaneous, occurring before the psyop was fully developed, or accompanied by being in a close location where they actually did experience the effects of the explosion or where they had a duty to be accurate about what they saw and heard.

All of those indicators of reliability result, time and time again, in the statement that an explosion was seen and heard.
 
Last edited:
jammonius said:
The above is absurdly false. My claims have been substantiated six ways to Sunday, including authentic eye and ear witnesses, the obvious falsity of a jetliner being present shown in one video segment after another. I have exposed the fraud and the inconclusive nature of the NIST report. I have shown that even among those who TOOK SOME OF THE VIDEOS, they did not think a plane was present and said so, in the video.
Click to expand...

You've done no such thing. All you've done is drone on, distort and twist statements to make them fit your delusion. The fact that you can do the same with video clips makes the delusion that much clearer to the casual observer.
 
jammonius said:
The above is absurdly false. My claims have been substantiated six ways to Sunday, including authentic eye and ear witnesses, the obvious falsity of a jetliner being present shown in one video segment after another.
Click to expand...

you have suggested that because some people were north of the second tower when it was hit, and were unable to see the plane approach, and stated they saw no plane.....that this is evidence that there were no planes on 9-11.

you have suggested that because people had their heads turned as the plane hit, and only saw the explosion and not the plane, that this is evidence that there were no planes on 9-11.

you have suggested that NYPD and FDNY personnel who were busy working and missed seeing the planes..and only heard the explosions..are actually "No-Planers".

dude, these assertions are either profoundly ignorant..or profoundly insane.

take your pick and let us know which one it is.


....I heard a car screech a few days ago..and then heard an impact..and then saw a car behind another car with a huge dent. since I did not actually SEE the impact..does that mean that it did not happen?
 
Last edited:
jammonius said:
Lurkers,

It is to be noted that the net number of witnesses to jetliners hitting the WTC on 9/11 that you are linked to in the above post is:

-0-

And, no matter how many posts there might be, that number will not ever get much beyond that. True, there are some, but it is nowhere near 1000s or even 1000 or even 500. It might actually be fewer than 50 that are reliable. I, myself, know of about 20; and, as to all of those, the power of suggestion, motivation to be seen as being patriotic and the influence of teevee are clearly present and evident in virtually all of those witness claims.

On the other hand, those who say they saw and heard an explosion are verified on the basis of the statements being spontaneous, occurring before the psyop was fully developed, or accompanied by being in a close location where they actually did experience the effects of the explosion or where they had a duty to be accurate about what they saw and heard.

All of those indicators of reliability result, time and time again, in the statement that an explosion was seen and heard.
Click to expand...

Ironic that your post was followed by one from somebody who saw it with his own eyes and was among thousands of people who saw it too.

Is dtugg a liar jammonius?
 
one last time:

http://cryptome.org/info/wtc-punch/wtc-punch.htm

No plane?


Where did the debris come from?

Witnesses to the plane:

Steve Gill

"the second plane passed literally over my head. I turned and saw it disappear into World Trade Center No. 2."


From 'New Yorkers Try To Carry On' by Linda Bloom.

http://www.wfn.org/2001/09/msg00170.html

Reverend Doctor Daniel P Matthews

"We were on the 24th floor, which has a view of the World Trade Centre, when we heard the sound, and looked up to see a ball of fire coming from one of the towers. A few minutes later, we saw the second plane hit, and again a ball of fire erupted."

From 'Eyewitness To Disaster' by John Allen. Tuesday 11th September 2001. Episcopal News Service.

http://www.episcopalchurch.org/3577_20738_ENG_HTM.htm

Haleh Nazeri

"Then all of a sudden I saw another plane, it was so loud and so low and so wrong. I knew before it even hit in the fraction of a second that something was terribly wrong and that my world would never be the same."

From 'The Iranian: Eyewitness, Attack On New York', 21st September 2001.

http://www.iranian.com/Features/2001/September/911

Karen Lane Gilsenan

"Then, it happened again. We saw an airplane, coming from the south and headed right toward the second WTC tower. It looked so odd there"

http://www.wheaton.edu/front/911/eyewitness.html

Rita Lasar

"I ran across the hall to my friends apartment. Her windows looked out on the World trade Centre and I got there in time to see the second plane hit the second building."

From 'Breaking The Silence' by John Pilger. Transmitted in September 2003 on ITV in the U.K.

Andrea Refol

"We were driving down Sackett Street in Brooklyn, and we watched the second plane make contact."

From 'The New York Metro: WTC Testimonials 6 Months Later'.

http://www.newyorkmetro.com/news/articles/wtc/6months/testimonials/3.htm

Rose Arce

"I got within a few blocks of the World Trade Centre when suddenly there was this second sort of, um, roar that came out of the sky and everyone just looked right up and another plane just barrelled into the other tower."

From 'CNN Tribute - America Remembers' - Produced by Ken Shiffman and Brian Rokus. 2002 Cable News Network.


Mitchell Simmons

"As we watched the building burn, we saw the second plane come around. It was very surreal because it felt like a movie, but it was reality."

From 'Marketers Are Eyewitness To History', September 12th 2001. By Kris Oser and Richard H. Levey.

http://directmag.com/news/marketing_marketers_eyewitness_history

Owen May

"As I'm standing there and all of these things going through my mind I'm watching a plane come in from the Statue Of Liberty... and as the guy got closer and closer I'm saying "Oh you know what, he must be here to drop water"... so as this plane starts coming closer I'm wondering "Where's the water? Doesn't look like one of these water planes" and I remember the engines just roaring and I could kind of hear this guy like hit the throttle and all of a sudden he starts to dip his wing..."

From 'A Tale Of Two Towers' - Michael Attwell Productions Ltd. Produced and directed by Michael Attwell. Channel 5 Broadcasting Ltd 2002. First transmitted in the U.K approximately 1 year after 911.

Amanda Mark

"Someone's like...a plane hit the World Trade Centre... so we all go into the conference room to look at this, and you can't really tell, it's burning, whatever. We're all watching that and another plane goes in..."

From '9/11 The Plane That Fought Back'. Directed by Bruce Goodison. Produced and written by Phil Craig.

Barry Mawn

"We were observing the evacuation when we actually saw the second plane come down, flying north to south, actually turn around. And then we lost it momentarily behind the buildings, and then the next time we saw it, it was headed straight for the south tower."

From 'CNN Live Today'. February 18, 2002 - 13:34 ET

http://www-cgi.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0202/18/lt.17.html


Here you can start with these; as you notice in some the quotes you will see the word WE, that is plural referencing more than one.

Here is a little advice, if one person tells you that you are on fire, you don't have to believe him, your choice. If two people tell you that you are on fire, you might want to take a second and start sniffing for smoke. Here is the important part, if three people tell you that you are on fire, you might want to take a long walk on a short pier, and partner there are a bunch of people telling you that you are a freakin inferno right now.

This was almost comical at first, but now its downright tragic. Your lack of rationality, common sense, and logic translates to ignorance beyond all imagination. Get some help, better yet, leave the house and see what the real world is like.
 
fitzgibbon said:
jammonius,

3 questions so that you can more easily frame the basis of your issues with the fuel explosion and its dynamics.

How quickly does jet fuel ignite?

How fast was the jet fuel going when it ignited as part of the impact with the WTC?

How would what you expect differ from what was observed?

Fitz
Click to expand...

Bump for jammonius. If you're a no-planer, how is it that the observed explosion bore all the characteristics of a fuel-air explosion where the fule was going on the order of 500mph?
 
AJM8125 said:
Ironic that your post was followed by one from somebody who saw it with his own eyes and was among thousands of people who saw it too.

Is dtugg a liar jammonius?
Click to expand...

I am pretty sure I am not the only person who has told jammy he's an eyewitness. Perhaps he requires that we give him our real names and contact info for it to count. Ace Baker demanded this when he was here with a sock a while ago. As if I would give this information to people who are demonstrably crazy. Last thing I need is some psycho no-planer stalking me.
 
Last edited:
dtugg said:
I am pretty sure I am not the only person who as told jammy he's an eyewitness.
Click to expand...

Yes, correct. Foolmewunz very clearly elaborated on what he saw:

Foolmewunz said:
(waves hand frantically)

Oooh! Oooh! Pick me! Pick me! Me! I know!

Well, thanks for calling on me, Teach! I witnessed the second plane* hitting WTC 2. I was as close as many people in lower Manhattan, but I was across the river (10 Exchange Place, right on the river and right opposite the towers and WFC). Ergo, I had an unobstructed view and equally (and more importantly as counter to your idiotic contentions) nothing to create an echo or any other sound effect.

Would you like to know how I first detected the plane*? Go on,.... ask!

I heard it.

It was coming from the area to the southwest of us (maybe WSW?) out past Liberty Park/Statue of Liberty and was therefore out over my right shoulder (as I looked across at the disaster already unfolding in Tower 1), so it was blocked by my own building.

But before we saw it (yes, "we" - there were dozens of us watching out of the windows), we all heard it. All we could see in the air was choppers and I remember thinking initially that that one chopper must be really loud because it sure sounded like a JET ENGINE. It was VERY LOUD. And then we saw the 767 come screaming into our line of vision (screaming - that's a euphemism for going real fast and real loud), and even on that first day, a number of us commented within moments that he seemed to be "gunning the engines, flooring it, revving the thing.....".

And there was no subway running under 10 Exchange Place, not that you could ever hear, because you couldn't hear the PATH train from the streets at that location. This I know from having worked there for almost ten years and never once being able to tell that a train had just passed regardless that two hundred people were now coming out of the station exit.

*Please note.... "planes". Not "shadow thingy" (that would be so precious if you were my kid - he's 18 months - for a supposed thinking adult, though, that's just plain pathetic, sick and wrong).

As I mentioned, there were dozens of people watching with me, and hundreds, if not thousands more downstairs when we were asked to evacuate our buildings. Strangers were crying on strangers' shoulders, Republicans were talking to Socialists, Blacks and Whites and Browns were all upset together, and we talked.... boy did we talk. It was like it was the only thing keeping us sane.

Number of persons who said, "That sure didn't sound like no plane to me." = 0
Number of persons who said, "You sure that was a plane? Sure looked like a shadow thing." = 0
Number of persons who said, "That sumbitz was so loud, I thought it was coming into our building and not going across the river." = 14
Number of persons who said, "I swear, it sounded like he was putting the throttle all the way forward and gaining speed at the end, there." = 20
Number of persons who said, "Just think, nine years from now, one of us is going to be arguing with deranged people on the internet about what just happened." = 0

So now you have both Big Al and I. We saw and heard it. Where are you taking our statements? You going to add them to your body of evidence? Or are you going to just ignore them until you can find another person's partial account and twist that to serve your own morbid fantasies?
(I'm voting that you'll go for the latter.)
Click to expand...
 
I might also ask how it is that when NIST developed detailed computer models of both the impact zones of each tower and of the Boeing 767s that hit them and, after a number of test runs simulating the impact of individual aircraft components with sections of WTC tower models, ultimately ran simulations of the entire plane hitting the entire impact zone model for each tower and found that the predicted damage to the outer walls of the towers closely corresponded to the actual damage as shown in the photographic record.

I don't mean a general, eyeball it and see if it looks OK comparison, I mean checking each individual column and asking "where did it fail?", "how did it fail?" "does that match what the model predicts?". You can find it all in NCSTAR 1-2, pp. 207-391 (pdf)

If there were no planes, then how in the Sam Hill did models of bleepin' planes hitting the towers predict just what was observed so well?

Jammy's insistence on restricting discussion to YouTube videos and cheap sophistry about eyewitnesses is just a way of trying to escape from the convergence of evidence, all of which adds up to Boeing 767s smashing into the towers.

For the love of Dowie and Ella Wheeler Wilcos, isn't this thread realistice enough already?
 
ktesibios said:
I might also ask how it is that when NIST developed detailed computer models of both the impact zones of each tower and of the Boeing 767s that hit them and, after a number of test runs simulating the impact of individual aircraft components with sections of WTC tower models, ultimately ran simulations of the entire plane hitting the entire impact zone model for each tower and found that the predicted damage to the outer walls of the towers closely corresponded to the actual damage as shown in the photographic record.

I don't mean a general, eyeball it and see if it looks OK comparison, I mean checking each individual column and asking "where did it fail?", "how did it fail?" "does that match what the model predicts?". You can find it all in NCSTAR 1-2, pp. 207-391 (pdf)

If there were no planes, then how in the Sam Hill did models of bleepin' planes hitting the towers predict just what was observed so well?

Jammy's insistence on restricting discussion to YouTube videos and cheap sophistry about eyewitnesses is just a way of trying to escape from the convergence of evidence, all of which adds up to Boeing 767s smashing into the towers.

For the love of Dowie and Ella Wheeler Wilcos, isn't this thread realistice enough already?
Click to expand...


All that proves is that NIST is in on it. As if we didn't know that before.
 
jammonius said:
I have addressed your old jetfighter mockup on a rail in an earlier post where the same tired video footage was trotted out by someone else in some other poor quality debunking attempt:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5955483&postcount=281

Debunkers have a tendency to resort to desparate attempts to make false comparisons. I have some advice for wannabe debunkers:

Do Better


ps
Lurkers, please note that I both cite sources for my claims and I engage in refutation of debunker claims. See post # 281 where the same video trotted out by Edx was trotted out by someone else.
Click to expand...

I cant see where you addressed my point I'm afraid.

Please bullet point your problems with it. You claimed it would break apart on impact not go right through, but we can see that if a jet hits a solid piece of reinforced concrete it just disintegrates. If its hitting something much weaker like the WTC which wasn't a solid object it would have been (and was) shredded THROUGH the building.

Your move, no planer.
 
Jammonious will NEVER say on JREF, that he accepts that there were planes on 9-11.

its part of his act...to be a make believe No-Planer.
 
fess said:
http://www.boeing.com/commercial/airports/arff/arff757.pdf

Try doing a little research before you post stupidity.
Click to expand...

He claimed what?? :eye-poppi Good God... he's not even right about minor details, let alone major conclusions.

*Sigh*... NIST even did variable cases of impact damage depending on where in the wing the fuel happened to be; that can be found in NCSTAR 1-2B. Someone who would've studied 9/11 instead of making things up would realize that fuel was in the wings, even if he didn't know this before.
 
Originally Posted by EventHorizon
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?
Click to expand...

Originally Posted by fess
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?
Click to expand...

Jammy, you still haven't addressed this...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

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