I was talking about the planes that hit the buildings square. I provided more evidence, more sources then everyone else on this thread combined (pertaining to what's in this thread alone) I provided evidence to hani's poor flying ability along with evidence that what he "did" took a fair amount of skill. I provided my own reasons as to why hitting the WTC the way they did...would be quite hard.
And, as several people pointed out, the terrorists were flying poorly. I think Oystein pointed out at least one nearly missed.
I never said any of this was impossible.
I never said you did. I did. I said
your alternative theories are impossible.
You definitely seem incapable of changing your thoughts,
I already pointed out where something seemed weird to me, until I got more info that made it make sense. At that point, I changed "my thoughts" from "that's weird" to "makes sense".
and ruthlessly attack anyone that shows problems with your dogma.
It's not dogma. It's logic. Nice ad hominem, ironically, attacking us for attacking you.
There is no doubt I have frustrated, stumped, and is some cases infuriated some members here. Why?
Because of your stubborn refusal to acknowledge facts contrary to your "alternative scenarios", AKA conspiracy theories. For example, you keep harping on about how its weird that Boeing can't talk because of national security issues. Their jets were involved in a major terrorist attack. Maybe there's something worth keeping secret, I don't know. Maybe they don't have time to humor Truthers nutjobs. Until there's evidence either way, making snide insinuations about their possible complicity is intellectually dishonest.
Because I provided evidence that is in direct contradiction of their dogma. I didn't back down from anyone...called people out on their crap, you know the ones who think they are simply brilliant, but most importantly I stayed with facts and assumptions based on evidence.
No, you've taken disparate facts, speculated wildly, and called it "evidence". For example, 757s/767s would require extensive and conspicuous physical modification to be flown by remote control. Just because remote controls exist for some planes doesn't mean that it would be possible to install said remotes in the jets used in the attacks. At the very least, both the groundcrew and flight crew--including the pilots who are about to be killed--would have to be in on it.
Being on your ignore list..is just about the highest form of a compliment anyone could pay me.
Ah, a masochist.
