• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

"Flashes" at South Tower before the impact

Carlos

Critical Thinker
Carlos
Joined
Aug 20, 2009
Messages
285
It's a idiocy to believe that those "flashes" were result of explosives planted in random places, but what is the explanation for this?

 
ummm, a plane hit the building?

You might want to specify which of the "flashes" you're referring to...JREF can be less than friendly towards posts like these...
 
Carlos said:
It's a idiocy to believe that those "flashes" were result of explosives planted in random places, but what is the explanation for this?

Click to expand...

What would your 'explanation' be?

The easy options of Camera recording issues? Glinting glass? Camera flashes? Pixel issues etc are less entertaining and carry no woooo.

Given that the 'flashes' you refer to are not resulting in any glass or debris at the point of those flashes and the lack of 'bang' that is a must when using any type of 'explosive' material then the basics of explosions is easily ruled out. Alas - it is far more interesting and prolonged to do the CT thing and ignore the lack of 'bangs' that emit the 'flash'. Speed of light and sound and all that.

'Flash to bang'. Look it up Carlos. It's not rocket science - unless...............
 
Well 1:19-1:26 has the most visible flashes occuring...

Did NIST cover these anywhere in their report?
 
ImANiceGuy said:
Well 1:19-1:26 has the most visible flashes occuring...

Did NIST cover these anywhere in their report?
Click to expand...

Then the ' blast' that produces each of these 'flashes' would be easily to determine too. It would be really easy to do if ya could. Can you?
 
If you look carefully you will also see these "flashes" in places other then the towers. Most noticeable in the river.
 
DGM said:
It's fun being a "conspiracy theorist". You can just let the imagination fly. Is that why they call it "having an open mind"?
Click to expand...

The typical twoofer's mind is so wide open that all manner of debris blows in with the wind.
 
DGM said:
Air-dropped torpedoes going for the storm drains to "get" the complex from below.


:eek:


It's fun being a "conspiracy theorist". You can just let the imagination fly. Is that why they call it "having an open mind"?
Click to expand...


And here's me thinking that they used mini nukes via the underground railway????

I suppose guided torpedoes and storm drains is feasible too. That would explain the 'miracle on the Hudson' episode. Off on a tangent again................
 
Jackanory said:
Then the ' blast' that produces each of these 'flashes' would be easily to determine too. It would be really easy to do if ya could. Can you?
Click to expand...

I don't understand.

Also, DGM, do you have a time mark in the video in which the flashes appear in the river? I couldn't see any immediately, but the flashes within the space occupied by the tower in the video are easily visible...

Also, DGM, are the flashes not consistent throughout all videos? If you know for sure, please do save me from having to search through WTC tower vids...
 
ImANiceGuy said:
I don't understand.

Also, DGM, do you have a time mark in the video in which the flashes appear in the river? I couldn't see any immediately, but the flashes within the space occupied by the tower in the video are easily visible...

Also, DGM, are the flashes not consistent throughout all videos? If you know for sure, please do save me from having to search through WTC tower vids...
Click to expand...

What is it that you don't understand? The OP asks for an explanation of the 'flashes'.

Regardless of the flashes in the river..........If the flashes on the building are as a result of 'explosions', either by 'explosives' or 'explosive materials' then a signature 'bang' will exist! Do you agree or disagree?
 
Jackanory said:
Then the ' blast' that produces each of these 'flashes' would be easily to determine too. It would be really easy to do if ya could. Can you?
Click to expand...

This is the sentence I don't understand. It's almost as though you're countering upon an idea I presented by starting your sentence with 'then' and ending with 'too'....doesn't make sense.

All I asked was if NIST had observed and commented upon said flashes in their reports....

Sorry if I confused you Jackanory; it is not my thread.
 
Last edited:
DGM said:
Air-dropped torpedoes going for the storm drains to "get" the complex from below.


:eek:


It's fun being a "conspiracy theorist". You can just let the imagination fly. Is that why they call it "having an open mind"?
Click to expand...

Seconded. And yes. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom