-
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?
- Thread starter jammonius
- Start date
-
- Tags
- no plane theory no planes
- Status
TJM
Potsing Whiled Runk
Since jammonius won't answer the questions of if he's been to NYC and if so, has he been on the subway, I'll answer for him:
Yes. He's been to NYC.
And apparently he didn't ride the subway. He doesn't know where it was.
As pointed out by phunk:
Cheers.
Yes. He's been to NYC.
And apparently he didn't ride the subway. He doesn't know where it was.
As pointed out by phunk:
Cheers.
Last edited:
Tinfoil Hater
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2010
- Messages
- 1,440
I was in NY about 2 weeks after 9/11- The whole city smelled of an electric fire- i'll never forget that smell..
leftysergeant
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2007
- Messages
- 18,863
Because all of them were recorded on video cameras sampling the light digitally. Normally, this will only provide a clear image of the target being recorded. The Hezarkani video, however, catches a lot of details of the aircraft and is more than adequate to identify it as an airliner of the type and livery claimed in the official narrative. Game over on that point.
Not a factual statement.
Totally false statement. The explosions occur exactly where they should, in exactly the proper sequence. They in no way resembl;e pyrotechnics. That would require massive reservoirs of liquid hydrocarbon fuel to have been stored in the locations where the aircraft hit. Somebody would have noticed that
The sound recorded on all videos shot from locations close enough, out in the open is in all ways consistant with the sound of a jet aircraft flying at low altitude and striking a building. The Hezarkhani video is perfect in this regard.
TJM
Potsing Whiled Runk
phunk
Illuminator
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2007
- Messages
- 4,127
What interpretation, it was a simple direct question. If the lawn of the pentagon has "evidence" all over it, should they gather the evidence, then put out the fire, or the other way around?
phunk
Illuminator
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2007
- Messages
- 4,127
Wait Thunder. How can you set out to engage in an objective exercise, while already pre-judging what the outcome will be?
Park Row is atop the conjunction of two parallel running subways according to maps I posted. That location is very likely a major bus stop, to this very day.
I only ask that you record at about 8:46AM or thereabouts.
I suggest you do so as a subway and bus are each approaching, separately and together.
Will you do that?
I'm curious, how is he supposed to know when a subway is approaching when you can't hear it from the street?
BigAl
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2007
- Messages
- 5,397
Some of us considered that smell to be that of a crematorium and the dust was the remains of people we knew.
Jammonious believes that the sound in the Dick Gregory video is that of a subway. Nothing will change his mind.
I could go down there, and record for 30 minutes, and tell him I heard NO subways. He still will insist that the sound in the video is the subway.
He caught me hook, like, and sinker. He got me to engage with him and his insane ideas for a few days.
Score one for Jamm.
Tinfoil Hater
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2010
- Messages
- 1,440
I was only there a weekend around the 25th of Sept, 2001, but it was heartbreaking..the power was still out in that part of Manhattan, there were signs posted everywhere of 'have you seen this person'? Off in the distance smoke still billowed from ground zero. I must have been stopped by a good dozen weeping people who asked me if I saw their missing loved one....I can't imagine how people who call New York their home can ever fully heal from that day...
I wince every time I hear people say we 'need to get over 9/11'.
I imagine there are people who lived through that aweful day who will think about that day every day, for the rest of their lives...
Just as Titanic survivors recalled the sinking with crystal clarity for decades after the sinking, so it will be for people who experienced 9/11.
It's one reason why i find 'no-planers', or anyeone else who downplays the deathtoll to be slime..
Last edited:
dj,
The Jammonius Effect revealed.
CLEARLY you are unfamiliar with the subtleties of "anisotropic acoustic propagation in large transport mechanisms".
In a rather strange inversion of normal quantum conditions, the phenomenon can only be detected in macroscopic, non-stationary (but hugely sub-relativistic) transporters of "observers". It is postulated that the observers are required to continuously collapse the quantum acoustic wave function.
The phenomenon was first described - but poorly understood - in 1987 in THIS WORK by Martin, Candy et al.
I'd go so far as to predict that this phenomenon is destined to be known to future generations as "The Jammonious Effect".
[If the engine on the transporter is disabled, and propulsion has to be provided by an auxilliary source, and yet the phenomenon persists, I wonder if that version might become known as "The Tow Jam Effect"?]
I don't know about you guys, but I feel singularly honored to be present at the birth of this paradigm-shifting discovery. I compare it to peering over the shoulders of the luminaries Fleischmann & Pons during their annus mirabilis.
I am amazed that Jammonius, while having absolutely zero background in any technical field related to, ... uh well, to anything pertinent, nonetheless has such a firm grasp on the subtle, complex theories required.
But, lest I embarrass myself by waxing all gushy over Jammonius' intellectual achievements, let's get back to the hard science.
This is a phenomenon in acoustics associated with the sound created by a large moving object that transports lots of "observers" (e.g., trains, planes, automobiles, etc).
As the name (anisotropic acoustic propagation) suggests, the sound waves interfere & massively distort as they propagate in two very specific directions: up or down a gravitational potential.
Ergo, the effect can only be detected when one is (gravitationally) above or below the source of the sound.
You are confused, dj, because you usually hear the sound from these trains that has only propagated horizontally.
If you hear the vertical propagation, then three amazing effects happen: three effects that I just confirmed by placing my laptop down into a hot air duct in a restroom, replacing the grating and playing your "passing train videos".
First, when heard from above, the sound waves distort such that rhythmic harmonics get spread into uniform, broad spectrum noise. This turns that "clackety-clack" into a darn good imitation of a turbine engine's whine.
Second, the apparent directional source inverts along the gravitational axis such that an observer would absolutely SWEAR that the sound were emanating from above, not below.
Third, one might expect that the sound of a passing train coming up thru a hole in the ground would appear to all the people on the street to be emanating from a stationary point (i.e., the hole), and merely getting louder & softer as the train goes by. But no.
In another complicated wave phenomenon, the sound coming up from a stationary point sounds EXACTLY as if it were transiting the sky above, nearly from horizon to horizon.
These "acoustic field effects", closely related to "The Huchinson Effect", are far too complex for your puny brain (or any of the other unsophisticated, politically motivated people here) to understand.
I suspect that we'd have to get some genius like Judy Wood to come by to explain it. Like most Huchinson Effect phenomena, a rigorous experimental demonstration requires a rather elaborate apparatus, involving little strings and inverted laboratories.
But, as I mentioned, you can get a real feel for it by dropping your laptop down a hole & then playing your train video.
Be warned that it'll be safer for you if you drop your laptop down about a 20' deep hole.
You see, even prepared with all the info above, when I ran the experiment, the sensation that I was being buzzed by a 500 mph Boeing 767 was so overwhelmingly convincing, I ducked so reflexively & so hard that my forehead has been bleeding for the last 1/2 hour.
Sacrifices in the name of science, don'tcha know.
Glad I could explain all this to you.
Now let's see everyone show Jam all the respect that he deserves for bringing this amazing phenomenon to our attention.
Tom
The Jammonius Effect revealed.
CLEARLY you are unfamiliar with the subtleties of "anisotropic acoustic propagation in large transport mechanisms".
In a rather strange inversion of normal quantum conditions, the phenomenon can only be detected in macroscopic, non-stationary (but hugely sub-relativistic) transporters of "observers". It is postulated that the observers are required to continuously collapse the quantum acoustic wave function.
The phenomenon was first described - but poorly understood - in 1987 in THIS WORK by Martin, Candy et al.
I'd go so far as to predict that this phenomenon is destined to be known to future generations as "The Jammonious Effect".
[If the engine on the transporter is disabled, and propulsion has to be provided by an auxilliary source, and yet the phenomenon persists, I wonder if that version might become known as "The Tow Jam Effect"?]
I don't know about you guys, but I feel singularly honored to be present at the birth of this paradigm-shifting discovery. I compare it to peering over the shoulders of the luminaries Fleischmann & Pons during their annus mirabilis.
I am amazed that Jammonius, while having absolutely zero background in any technical field related to, ... uh well, to anything pertinent, nonetheless has such a firm grasp on the subtle, complex theories required.
But, lest I embarrass myself by waxing all gushy over Jammonius' intellectual achievements, let's get back to the hard science.
This is a phenomenon in acoustics associated with the sound created by a large moving object that transports lots of "observers" (e.g., trains, planes, automobiles, etc).
As the name (anisotropic acoustic propagation) suggests, the sound waves interfere & massively distort as they propagate in two very specific directions: up or down a gravitational potential.
Ergo, the effect can only be detected when one is (gravitationally) above or below the source of the sound.
You are confused, dj, because you usually hear the sound from these trains that has only propagated horizontally.
If you hear the vertical propagation, then three amazing effects happen: three effects that I just confirmed by placing my laptop down into a hot air duct in a restroom, replacing the grating and playing your "passing train videos".
First, when heard from above, the sound waves distort such that rhythmic harmonics get spread into uniform, broad spectrum noise. This turns that "clackety-clack" into a darn good imitation of a turbine engine's whine.
Second, the apparent directional source inverts along the gravitational axis such that an observer would absolutely SWEAR that the sound were emanating from above, not below.
Third, one might expect that the sound of a passing train coming up thru a hole in the ground would appear to all the people on the street to be emanating from a stationary point (i.e., the hole), and merely getting louder & softer as the train goes by. But no.
In another complicated wave phenomenon, the sound coming up from a stationary point sounds EXACTLY as if it were transiting the sky above, nearly from horizon to horizon.
These "acoustic field effects", closely related to "The Huchinson Effect", are far too complex for your puny brain (or any of the other unsophisticated, politically motivated people here) to understand.
I suspect that we'd have to get some genius like Judy Wood to come by to explain it. Like most Huchinson Effect phenomena, a rigorous experimental demonstration requires a rather elaborate apparatus, involving little strings and inverted laboratories.
But, as I mentioned, you can get a real feel for it by dropping your laptop down a hole & then playing your train video.
Be warned that it'll be safer for you if you drop your laptop down about a 20' deep hole.
You see, even prepared with all the info above, when I ran the experiment, the sensation that I was being buzzed by a 500 mph Boeing 767 was so overwhelmingly convincing, I ducked so reflexively & so hard that my forehead has been bleeding for the last 1/2 hour.
Sacrifices in the name of science, don'tcha know.
Glad I could explain all this to you.
Now let's see everyone show Jam all the respect that he deserves for bringing this amazing phenomenon to our attention.
Tom
Last edited:
Guys,
We have all been doing WAY too much work here. We're swatting mosquitoes with sledge hammers.
Jam has done all the heavy lifting for all of us. We owe him a giant, sloppy "thank you".
This is trivially simple:
As everyone (including Jam) agrees, Jam looks at his "44 videos"...
He reads in the NIST report about the 6 separate analyses (done by 5 independent groups) to get the speed of impact, using at least 7 distinct videos of Ft. 175 flying into WTC2...
he sees this still:
and these:
and this one:
and this:
... and hundreds of others ...
... each one confirming all the others ...
... and he concludes that "there was no jet".
Our job is done, guys.
Time to hit the bar. Who's buying the first round?
Tom
PS. After writing this, I had a rather uncomfortable revelation ...
"Only a moron would get dragged into even a momentary debate with a moron proposing such a moronic contention."
Ouch. That one stung.
From an "intellectual self-respect" point of view, I feel it is acceptable (perhaps obligatory) to point fingers & laugh at Jam & his nonsense.
But attempting any "reasoned argument" is demeaning.
We have all been doing WAY too much work here. We're swatting mosquitoes with sledge hammers.
Jam has done all the heavy lifting for all of us. We owe him a giant, sloppy "thank you".
This is trivially simple:
As everyone (including Jam) agrees, Jam looks at his "44 videos"...
He reads in the NIST report about the 6 separate analyses (done by 5 independent groups) to get the speed of impact, using at least 7 distinct videos of Ft. 175 flying into WTC2...
he sees this still:
and these:
and this one:
and this:
... and hundreds of others ...
... each one confirming all the others ...
... and he concludes that "there was no jet".
Our job is done, guys.
Time to hit the bar. Who's buying the first round?
Tom
PS. After writing this, I had a rather uncomfortable revelation ...
"Only a moron would get dragged into even a momentary debate with a moron proposing such a moronic contention."
Ouch. That one stung.
From an "intellectual self-respect" point of view, I feel it is acceptable (perhaps obligatory) to point fingers & laugh at Jam & his nonsense.
But attempting any "reasoned argument" is demeaning.
Tinfoil Hater
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2010
- Messages
- 1,440
I think Jam would just assert there no confirmation that the object flying towards the twin towers was a jet plane.
Jamm thinks it was a *hologram*, does he not?
Jamm thinks it was a *hologram*, does he not?
dafydd
Banned
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2008
- Messages
- 35,398
I'll hold you to that.I have tried to stop responding to Jammy,but it has become an addiction.I need my daily dose of lunacy.
- Status