Warring No planer factions- Shansksville and Pentagon no-planers vs WTC no planers

Justin39640 said:
Actually... There is just as many videos of the North tower impact as there is for the Pentagon crash. (2 I believe of each). After the first tower was hit (in Manhattan, you know that tiny city on the east coast where no-one lives and TV pays no attention to...:rolleyes:), is it really that surprising hundreds of cameras were trained on the Towers to capture the second crash?

Use your brain.
Click to expand...
There is at least one very good video of the north tower jet impact; there is no similar footage of a jet flying into the Pentagon (you see some cheap time lapse shots that show a streak and then a fireball and that's about it). I have no idea what "Use your brain" is all about. You seem to have missed the point of my earlier post.
 
Last edited:
This of course takes the pictures out of their context and ignores all the other lines of supporting evidence. Truthers and Apollohoaxers are the same on this. They compartmentalise everything and assume that if you knock one brick out the wall collapses and all the other evidence in support of 9/11 or Apollo can be disregarded.
 
leftysergeant said:
So, that leaves you either ignorant or delusional. Take your pick.
Click to expand...

Why either/or? Why not both?? The two do seem to go together quite often.

As for the photo of the plane sticking up out of the ground, Spooked911 once posted a drawing (on lined school notebook paper yet!) that showed what he thought we'd see, and it was indeed a plane sticking out of the ground like that...
 
Last edited:
leftysergeant said:
And did you see how high it bounced and how far it rolled? I think the pilot bounced more He could not have gotten away with opening his chute any lower. He would have broken far more than just a leg.
Click to expand...
.
That was his first ejection from the -29! :)
He's had at least one more.
 
1337m4n said:
By any chance, were you expecting a photo that looked like this?

[qimg]http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/why/whypics/76_planeIntoCrater0.jpg[/qimg]

If so, you are beyond redemption and I officially give up attempting to convince you otherwise.
Click to expand...

That's exactly what Dylan Avery said about Shanksville. If a plane crashed at the alleged crash site there should have been a big hole in the ground with a intact plane sticking out of it. :boggled:
 
It boggles my mind that no planers will argue that planes at the WTC were not strong enough to cut through the outer facade of the towers, yet planes are strong enough to remain intact after a high speed nose dive into the ground.

Which is it no planers?
 
dc1971 said:
I was in a chat room with a couple on Sept. 11, 2001 who said they witnessed the crash in Shanksville. They saw the plane and the crash! How many times should I repeat myself???
Click to expand...

You had a chat on the internet. Well, case closed indeed.
 
- Lisa Beamer: "The plane had pierced the earth like a spoon in a cup of coffee: the spoon forced the coffee back, and then the coffee immediately closed around the spoon as though nothing had troubled the surface. Anything that remained of Flight 93 was buried deep in the ground."

- Veteran FBI agent Michael Soohy: "It's almost like a dart hitting a pile of flour. ... The plane went in, and the stuff back-filled right over it."

- "The rest of the 757 continued its downward passage, the sandy loam closing behind it like the door of a tomb." - The Age
Click to expand...

I guess this is the testimony RI uses. I know it's a few days late, but this isn't the first time I've heard references to this. For anyone who didn't already know he's taking simile and metaphor and exaggerating them to make the idea that the plane broke up while and fragments got buried seem overly and extravagantly exaggerated and over the top than it really is. A lot like the explosion testimony at the WTC, where even real occurrences are thought of never as routine components of a large fire event, but instead always some kind of intentionally planted explosive by use of simile.


Like I've said before, if the evidence were there of a cover up, then seasoning the stories with extra spice to spruce them up to one's liking shouldn't ever need to grasp at so many straws.
 
Last edited:
Grizzly Bear said:
I guess this is the testimony RI uses. I know it's a few days late, but this isn't the first time I've heard references to this. For anyone who didn't already know he's taking simile and metaphor and exaggerating them to make the idea that the plane broke up while and fragments got buried seem overly and extravagantly exaggerated and over the top than it really is. A lot like the explosion testimony at the WTC, where even real occurrences are thought of never as routine components of a large fire event, but instead always some kind of intentionally planted explosive by use of simile.


Like I've said before, if the evidence were there of a cover up, then seasoning the stories with extra spice to spruce them up to one's liking shouldn't ever need to grasp at so many straws.
Click to expand...

They are not being all that metaphoric. Do any of these descriptions sound logical to you?
 
Let me see if I'm following your logic:
If badly written descriptions of an event are published, then that is evidence the event never happened.
 
RedIbis said:
They are not being all that metaphoric. Do any of these descriptions sound logical to you?
Click to expand...

Reality is people exaggerate whether they intend to or not. I don't envision a spoon dipping into a giant cup of coffee because somebody used the metaphor to try and visualize the crash in words. The speed, angle of approach, and mass all tell me that:

A) The aircraft isn't going to survive in one piece
B) The force of the impact will create a hole in the ground and bury a fair amount of the debris, and eject some of it beyond.

Odds are pretty slim that it looked anything like "a spoon in a cup of coffee." There's a difference between the metaphorical description of what you see in an instant and what you see, then have time to analyze.
 
Last edited:
RedIbis, are you arguing that if video footage of a plane crash is absent, then the plane crash did not occur?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom