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

dc1971 said:
I guess you're another one to suggest that the laws of physics were broken on that day and that day only! Talk to Professor Judy Wood much?
Click to expand...

Isn't it Judy Wood who has talked about particle weapons used and such things? I try to keep an open mind, but that sounds way too much of Independence Day movie sci-fi to me.
 
tsig said:
Throw an egg at a tennis racket at 500 mph and see what happens.
Click to expand...


Actually that would be an interesting test... I'd love to see it.

(no really)
(though I have a feeling the egg would not be able to be accelerated to that speed... (personal incredulity), now a boiled egg....)
 
Anders Lindman said:
Even then it would be a splash, if the strings in the racked are strong enough. Picture, if you will, the floors of the WTC towers as strings. Would they be strong 'strings' in that analogy? Yes, they would. You can't have a fragile airliner glide through that 'tennis racket' as if it was made of thin air.

Nor would the wings fold back as one witness said about what he said was an airliner crashing into the Pentagon. That would be just ludicrous. Nor would an airliner plow deep underground and bury itself as they claim has happened near Shanksville. That would hardly even happen in a B-movie. We are talking about reality here I hope.
Click to expand...

Psa 1771.

are you telling me psa 1771 never happened? that its crash was faked?
 
Anders Lindman said:
Isn't it Judy Wood who has talked about particle weapons used and such things? I try to keep an open mind, but that sounds way too much of Independence Day movie sci-fi to me.
Click to expand...

...and using CGI to project planes on live television isn't. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
 
Anders Lindman said:
That would be pretty lethal. The effect would be almost the same I guess if the building (tennis racket) was moving at 250 mph and the plane (egg) moving at 250 mph toward each other. My point is that why did the building behave as if it was made of thin air?
Click to expand...

Ummm no.

your physics analogy is wrong.

Look up mythbusters and their colliding semi's. They make the same error you are making, and at a later date fix the misunderstood physics.

you might want to do the same thing.

as for your last line
'why did the building behave as if it was made of thin air?'
Maybe you don't realize that the towers were actually made of 95% "thin air"? right?
 
dc1971 said:
...and using CGI to project planes on live television isn't. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

No, it isn't. It's a real possibility. The big question is how some people managed to insert the computer graphics planes. That's a big question I admit. Maybe New York City had/has one of those Media Control Centers where they could do that centrally, BUT if so, getting control over such center would require a pretty big conspiracy.
 
Anders Lindman said:
"The plane was estimated to have crashed at a speed of around 700 mph (1100 km/h, 600 kn), disintegrating instantly."

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_Southwest_Airlines_Flight_1771

Disintegrated! Instantly! Not gliding into a steel and concrete building or into the ground.
Click to expand...

Psa 1771 hit the ground at nearly the same speed as flight 93 in shanksville. No one has ever said it was "gliding" into the ground.

Are you claiming that psa 1771 (with many of the same characteristics as the crash of flight 93) was fake? yes or no.
 
Anders Lindman said:
I guess all civilian radar data is public information. And then radar data from a large number of radar stations must have been doctored if there were no planes. I have said before that a massive cover-up has been done and is still going on.
Click to expand...

You do realize how difficult it would be to “doctor” all the radar information that was available for each of these flights… don’t you? So, why don’t you show some evidence of how this was done?
 
Anders Lindman said:
I was thinking, if there were no planes, then many foreign governments must already know this! And they can use that knowledge to blackmail the U.S. government. :eek:
Click to expand...

Isn't it strange that no one individual or country has made this claim? Not even our staunchest enemies.
 
Anders Lindman said:
I'm a bit sloppy sometimes. It would be too burdensome for me to check everything in detail.
Click to expand...

You have already informed us that you are too lazy to do any research at all in making up your fantasies. No reason to repeat your self.
 
fess said:
You do realize how difficult it would be to “doctor” all the radar information that was available for each of these flights… don’t you? So, why don’t you show some evidence of how this was done?
Click to expand...

Yeah, I guess that would be a rather big cover-up, but it could have been done!
 
fess said:
Isn't it strange that no one individual or country has made this claim? Not even our staunchest enemies.
Click to expand...

But if some foreign government would make such claim, then they would not be able to blackmail the U.S. government. I was thinking of a blackmail where some foreign powers tell the Obama administration for example to do this or that, or else they will expose the cover-up of the 9/11 attacks.
 
Anders Lindman said:
No, it isn't. It's a real possibility. The big question is how some people managed to insert the computer graphics planes. That's a big question I admit. Maybe New York City had/has one of those Media Control Centers where they could do that centrally, BUT if so, getting control over such center would require a pretty big conspiracy.
Click to expand...

If you would do a little research on the subject, you would find that the controllers at EWR had visual contact with Flt. 175 prior to it hitting the south tower. How did they see a computer generated image?
 
Anders Lindman said:
But if some foreign government would make such claim, then they would not be able to blackmail the U.S. government. I was thinking of a blackmail where some foreign powers tell the Obama administration for example to do this or that, or else they will expose the cover-up of the 9/11 attacks.
Click to expand...

Funny, I was thinking about how ludicrous your claims are. How would the Obama administration pull off anything without Congress being in on it? How many more people are you going to add to this cover-up?
 
fess said:
Funny, I was thinking about how ludicrous your claims are. How would the Obama administration pull off anything without Congress being in on it? How many more people are you going to add to this cover-up?
Click to expand...

This is related to the question about doctoring radar data. Yes, I believe a massive cover-up has been done and is still going on today. I'm not sure about the idea that foreign powers could blackmail the U.S. government. I don't know much about politics and power games.
 
fess said:
If you would do a little research on the subject, you would find that the controllers at EWR had visual contact with Flt. 175 prior to it hitting the south tower. How did they see a computer generated image?
Click to expand...

Prior, how much prior? It seems certain that flight 175 was a real plane, but I don't think it crashed into the WTC. There is even evidence for flight 175 still flying in the air after it is supposed to have crashed (see previous posts).
 
Anders Lindman said:
http://www.bentham.org/open/tocpj/articles/V002/7TOCPJ.pdf
Click to expand...
No - I and others have already debunked that nonsense extensively here at JREF showing that what they found was flakes of rust with paint attached.

Your problem is you don't know what thermite is or what the thermite reaction is, therefore you don't know what the products (residue) of a thermite reaction are. Tons and tons of thermite reactant products would stick out like a saw thumb, not to mention the damage patterns to the steel and Al2O3 stuck all over it. The steel was inspected and nothing like this was found.

And please don't cite the "swiss cheese" steel with an Fe-S/Fe-O eutectic as proof because I'll be all over it like a rash debunking your thinking with science.
 
Sunstealer said:
No - I and others have already debunked that nonsense extensively here at JREF showing that what they found was flakes of rust with paint attached.

Your problem is you don't know what thermite is or what the thermite reaction is, therefore you don't know what the products (residue) of a thermite reaction are. Tons and tons of thermite reactant products would stick out like a saw thumb, not to mention the damage patterns to the steel and Al2O3 stuck all over it. The steel was inspected and nothing like this was found.

And please don't cite the "swiss cheese" steel with an Fe-S/Fe-O eutectic as proof because I'll be all over it like a rash debunking your thinking with science.
Click to expand...

White smoke AND molten metal pouring out from floor 81 sure looks like something like Thermite used: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Mz0_x7313I
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom