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

[Oystein]

jammonius has now tought us in so many words about admissable and inadmissable methods to interpret photographs, videos and witness statements, both direct and indirect.

Great.

Now that "we" have established this solid set of methods, I would like for jammonius to present
A) his alternative theory about 9/11 (DEW or whatever)
B) the photographs, videos and witness statements, both direct and indirect that informed to the effect that he thinks DEW (or whatever) is a better explanation than planes
C) His methods, as hinted at above, at work interpreting these photographs, videos and witness statements, both direct and indirect

I would be very much surprised if at step C) he would be able to present more that NAUGHT.

 

[CompusMentus]

Jammonius has a dragon in his garage.

Perhaps if we leave him alone he will spend the rest of his days discussing this nonsense with his invisible pet fire-breather and give the rest of us some peace.

Compus

 

[Mancman]

We tried a 7 day 9-11 Truth boycott.

How about a 7 day boycott of Jamm and his No-Plane theories?

7 days?

How about simply never responding to him again, ever? It's pointless, it's not entertaining on any level.

 

[Dave Rogers]

How about simply never responding to him again, ever? It's pointless, it's not entertaining on any level.

The Ignore function is very effective here. Since jammonius has nothing worthwhile to add to any discussion, and his ideas are so clearly insane that nobody is likely to be taken in by his fractured logic, there's no point in even acknowledging his existence. Save the effort for truthers who actually have a semi-coherent argument to debunk.

Dave

 

[Thunder]

Using no-planer logic- I was in Boston when the planes hit-I can't see New York from Boston, so I didn't see planes hit the towers. Is that proof that there were no planes?

yes. yes it is.

 

[fess]

I have gone over the flight particulars numerous times. So posters here know them by now, I would think.

Yes, we have seen and read your "particulars" numerous times. Do we believe them? No!

Please try to be a little more forthcoming with your own process of thinking about the information that is right in front of you.

You may want to practice your own advise.

 

[fess]

Hey, AJM,
I consistently say I do not rely on NO PLANE accounts from newspapers or truther sites anymore than I would suggest debunkers rely on newspapers or debunker sites for witnesses.

So, from what you say, I gather that not one of the MSM venues in the entire world can be trusted... right?

I have been consistent in saying this and in showing my sources.

If you are infering that your cherry picked YT video is a source of fact, you are really in a bad... aw, never mind.

 

[fess]

I am not naive.

No, misinformed maybe, unknowledgeable maybe, A liar maybe, a fraud maybe, but naïve maybe not.

How many times have you seen the following sentence in my posts:

You can continue to believe jetliners hit the Twin Towers for as long as you can.

Thank you for your permission to believe what we know is fact.

Get it?

Yes, do you?

 

[fess]

You have yet to explain the airplane debris found on the streets below the Twin Towers, and on nearby rooftops. Do you think that wreckage was planted?

You can ask Jammonius questions until the Messiah returns to Earth, which, from what I understand, will happen in 2012, but you will not get a sensible answer. You know, “20 questions”, “gotcha games”, and all of the other malarkey that he spews forth. He has been asked several pertinent questions in this thread and has refused to answer any of them.

 

[fess]

How can a rational person reject that planes hit the towers, despite the seemingly infinite ammount of evidence...

Using no-planer logic- I was in Boston when the planes hit-I can't see New York from Boston, so I didn't see planes hit the towers. Is that proof that there were no planes?

Though you may have been in Boston, you were a lot closer than Jammonius was.

 

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

I think Jam needs to get with the times. The Truth Movement clearly stated on their website that there were indeed planes on 9/11. And that other Truthers, like Jam, claim that there were "no planes" makes the TM look like a bunch of retards. Well, who's gonna judge that? Not me! LOL!

 

[twinstead]

Most truthers think people like Jammonius are actually working for the government to discredit their 'movement'.

 

[carlitos]

Honestly, the plane / hologram delusion has just as much evidence as any other delusion.

 

[djlunacee]

Okay, so just to make sure I am up to date here, we have Jammonious in one corner claiming there were no plans based on some crappy youtube videos, that have no sound that reflects in his mind that no planes were present at WTC that day. In light of rational and logical explanation as to why there was no sound and the sound he expects to hear is not what he thinks it should be (earsplitting, hearing damage inducing decibel levels) in light of all the scientific evidence that shows contrary to what he believes.

He also claims that none of our evidence would be admissable in a court of law in light of the outcome of the ZM trial and the evidence allowed in court there. (Thank You for providing that link Carlitos)

To further his delusion and to keep his fantasy charade going, he has tried to reinvent the english language so that the noun we no longer includes the person making the statement?

And further more he also believes that the air in the center of the columns mean nothing, that these are still solid steel. Did we ever clear up the fact that a Boeing 767 carries its fuel in the wings and not the nose of the plane?

Am I missing anything else? or am I up to speed on these matters?

I have asked for three pages now on some clarification of what in blue blazes is shadow thingy if it isn't a plane and have yet to get an answer.

I mean seriously, lurkers, let us look at it this way. If you had been in a coma for the last nine years, and all of this information is presented to you, who has the more plausible explanation?

Is it the faction that believes 19 radical islamic jihadists hijacked four planes with predetermined targets in mind commited an act of war against the USA, and in doing so extinguished 3000 lives prematurely with no regard for the fact that these people were innocent?

or


Is it Jammonious story of holograms, energy weapons fired from wherever, that no planes were present, and the US government, planned and commited the most atrocious crime on US soil to innocent civilians?


Just asking, since the whole appeal of this thread seems to be convincing the "lurkers" just wondering where they all stood, I already know where most of them stand as they have flat out come out and posted where they stood.

Is he convincing you?

 

[SanityGap]

Just asking, since the whole appeal of this thread seems to be convincing the "lurkers" just wondering where they all stood, I already know where most of them stand as they have flat out come out and posted where they stood.

Is he convincing you?

I'll buy it. It's clear to me that it was conceived and planed by the same crew from the NWO that fooled us all with the fake moon landings. Obviously the Reptilians helped with the high tech stuff, DEW and the like. I also know (Jammie's not up to speed on this, he needs to dig deeper into the blobby things yet) that in actual fact the towers are still there, it's just that now they are invisible. It's obvious to me that you cannot just make towers invisible, hence the elaborate hoax.
You see, I know they are being used for cooling towers for a part finished power station.
Anybody want to prove me wrong?

 

[excaza]

I'll buy it. It's clear to me that it was conceived and planed by the same crew from the NWO that fooled us all with the fake moon landings. Obviously the Reptilians helped with the high tech stuff, DEW and the like. I also know (Jammie's not up to speed on this, he needs to dig deeper into the blobby things yet) that in actual fact the towers are still there, it's just that now they are invisible. It's obvious to me that you cannot just make towers invisible, hence the elaborate hoax.
You see, I know they are being used for cooling towers for a part finished power station.
Anybody want to prove me wrong?

I'm assuming you're kidding, but in case you're not: How about you start by proving you right.

 

[excaza]

And further more he also believes that the air in the center of the columns mean nothing, that these are still solid steel. Did we ever clear up the fact that a Boeing 767 carries its fuel in the wings and not the nose of the plane?

Not directed at you, but I'd like to point out (again, not that it would register to those who need it) that even if the beams were solid steel, a fully loaded passenger aircraft traveling in excess of 500 miles per hour would still rip right through them. I suppose if the WTC had been solid steel blocks the explosions may have behaved like Jamm says they should have. Then again, if they were solid blocks you get into the fact that the towers would most likely collapse under their own weight, tip over and/or snap because they can't flex, and would be extraordinarily expensive. Plus you can't work inside a solid steel block.

 

[SanityGap]

I'm assuming you're kidding...

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Why are people still talking to the no planer?

 

[excaza]

Why are people still talking to the no planer?

Mental exercise?