Moderated What Caused the Plane Shaped Hole

[DGM]

LOL, that was not an FEA.

As stated in my video showing the "impact" from Purdue's cartoon, they didn't represent the damage. They showed the wings sliding effortlessly into the tower, totally contrary to what the NIST claimed, as well as the visible damage. It's in the video, I'm surprised you missed it.

So now it's your fantasy against their "cartoon"? They used science and you used..............what did you use again?

 

[Jack by the hedge]

So you're saying the trains match the damage evidence? Interesting. I've never heard that one. Hologram trains or real ones?

Secret government trains, naturally, not civilian ones. Definitely off inventory. Leaping a thousand feet into the air with ultra high precision tragetting isn't in the specification for any train that we know about, but they would hardly tell us, would they?

 

[DGM]

So you're saying the trains match the damage evidence? Interesting. I've never heard that one. Hologram trains or real ones?

Are you saying there were no trains? I have quotes that place trains at the scene. How do you determine what quotes to believe?

 

[DGM]

Secret government trains, naturally, not civilian ones. Definitely off inventory. Leaping a thousand feet into the air with ultra high precision tragetting isn't in the specification for any train that we know about, but they would hardly tell us, would they?

The tracks are plasma and can be turned off and on. They're almost impossible to see but the accuracy is undeniable.

Yankee451, now you have to prove this wrong.

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

So now it's your fantasy against their "cartoon"? They used science and you used..............what did you use again?

Because they took the data output and turned it into a digital animation it's a "cartoon." I've run across this one before.

At Delusional Idiots Forum.

Where the answer to "what about all the videos?" was "who would film a smoking tower? They'd go get a cup of coffee."

 

[Robrob]

Then by all means use this forum to provide said proof. Be specific.

Reversed Burden of Proof.

 

[DGM]

The sad part here is, my trains on plasma rails (I should add they look a lot like Boeing 767s) has as much evidence as what yankee451 claims. In fact, I could use most of his work in support.

 

[yankee451]

Multiple projectiles of what? Missiles? Where are the signs of multiple projectile exploaions? They weren’t in your video, or the Naudet video. And, how were these projectiles smuggled out of inventory? There was however the sound of a very large jet overhead just before the impact.

A 767 couldn’t cause the damage shown? Why?

JASSMs have 60x12 inch dense metal penetrating warheads with fuses that can distinguish whether they're penetrating soil, rock or concrete and their use was mostly to cut the wing gashes, hence they didn't need to detonate on impact.
http://yankee451.com/2013/09/04/jassm-documentation/

The Airforce had at least 35 pilot production JASSMs before 9/11:

 

[yankee451]

The sad part here is, my trains on plasma rails (I should add they look a lot like Boeing 767s) has as much evidence as what yankee451 claims. In fact, I could use most of his work in support.

And yet only yankee451 has brought evidence to the table.

 

[Robrob]

JASSMs have 60x12 inch dense metal penetrating warheads with fuses that can distinguish whether they're penetrating soil, rock or concrete and their use was mostly to cut the wing gashes, hence they didn't need to detonate on impact.

You've made the claim, now you need to provide actual evidence supporting it. To begin, you might explain how every picture of the impact site opening looks like a jet? As a suggestion, you might try and find pictures of actual missile strikes exhibiting your claimed "gash" appearance.

And yet only yankee451 has brought evidence to the table.

Odd, I must have missed your "evidence." Could you provide the link to where you posted it here?

By the way, I don't need a math background to know you are incapable of providing the proof you demand of others.

So we can add math to the list of subjects in which you have no background but want us to accept your claims without question?

 

[DGM]

And yet only yankee451 has brought evidence to the table.

I said your evidence of no planes supports the train theory. I have more eyewitnesses though.

Want to join the team?

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

{re JASSSM jism}

But!

A) Nobody saw missiles.
B) Thousands saw planes, in broad daylight, flying across miles if sky, complete with time-distance-accurate sound.
C) Over 20 videos of the second plane have surfaced, one only after several months of sitting in a box because the young couple decided to leave NYC after the attack.
D) Plane ejecta can be seen in most of the videos mentioned above exiting the building at a time consistent with an airplane impacting the building at over 500mph
E) Said plane ejecta was found downrange, including a piece of fuselage over 100'square on top of a nearby skyscraper. (Let me guess -- that one is teh fakes? or did the NWO garden gnomes smuggle it up the elevator shaft when nobody was looking?)

Ya got nuthin' and your presentation of nuthin' is barely even amusing.

 

[yankee451]

You've made the claim, now you need to provide actual evidence supporting it. To begin, you might explain how every picture of the impact site opening looks like a jet?

Because they were going to broadcast a cartoon jet on TeeVee and a "plane shaped hole" would be easier for the brainwashed masses than a roadrunner-shaped hole? Just a guess, but I'm pretty sure most of the blind trusters would still convince themselves the jet made the hole.

As a suggestion, you might try and find pictures of actual missile strikes exhibiting your claimed "gash" appearance.

Snicker. Because in Randi World only pictures are proof now? What about the math?

 

[DGM]

Because they were going to broadcast a cartoon jet on TeeVee and a "plane shaped hole" would be easier for the brainwashed masses than a roadrunner-shaped hole? Just a guess, but I'm pretty sure most of the blind trusters would still convince themselves the jet made the hole.

Missiles don't have that kind of precision. only a train on rails could do that.

Join my team.

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

Because they were going to broadcast a cartoon jet on TeeVee and a "plane shaped hole" would be easier for the brainwashed masses than a roadrunner-shaped hole? Just a guess, but I'm pretty sure most of the blind trusters would still convince themselves the jet made the hole.

Please explain how the NWO garden gnomes kept a potential 5 million witnesses in teh 5 mile radius from plunking a VHS camera on the balcony and filming the second attack. If you cannot do this you cannot reject the videos I've presented to you at least 4 times now.

Go ahead, I know you have me on "la la I can't hear you" so don't respond. Again.

Snicker. Because in Randi World only pictures are proof now? What about the math?

Do you mean the math of kinetic energy that would be delivered to the building by a 767 at 500mph? Or the math of the ejecta trajectories seen in multiple videos that can be studied to locate the actual ejecta found in the wild?

Or do you mean the math of "making stuff up" like a cloud of missiles flying in precision airplane-shaped formation to make a plane shaped hole?

 

[Robrob]

{re JASSSM jism}
A) Nobody saw missiles.
B) Thousands saw planes, in broad daylight, flying across miles if sky, complete with time-distance-accurate sound.
C) Over 20 videos of the second plane have surfaced, one only after several months of sitting in a box because the young couple decided to leave NYC after the attack.
D) Plane ejecta can be seen in most of the videos mentioned above exiting the building at a time consistent with an airplane impacting the building at over 500mph
E) Said plane ejecta was found downrange, including a piece of fuselage over 100'square on top of a nearby skyscraper. (Let me guess -- that one is teh fakes? or did the NWO garden gnomes smuggle it up the elevator shaft when nobody was looking?)

Ya got nuthin' and your presentation of nuthin' is barely even amusing.

Hard to argue thousands of eyewitnesses were all conspirators.

Because they were going to broadcast a cartoon jet on TeeVee and a "plane shaped hole" would be easier for the brainwashed masses than a roadrunner-shaped hole? Just a guess, but I'm pretty sure most of the blind trusters would still convince themselves the jet made the hole.

Insult noted. Lack of evidence also noted.

As a suggestion, you might try and find pictures of actual missile strikes exhibiting your claimed "gash" appearance.

Snicker. Because in Randi World only pictures are proof now? What about the math?

So we can add lack of evidence for missile strikes to you long list of missing "evidence?"

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

robrob - please fix your quote tags in 534. It looks like I said something someone else said.

thanks

 

[yankee451]

Lots of boasting here but a surprising lack of evidence to support your claims.

There's a video that explains it all. Seen it?

 

[Slowvehicle]

So you're saying the trains match the damage evidence? Interesting. I've never heard that one. Hologram trains or real ones?

Air-to-Surface-launched diesel/electric coal trains pulled by EMD GP-50s from atop the Woolworth Building.

 

[Slowvehicle]

JASSMs have 60x12 inch dense metal penetrating warheads with fuses that can distinguish whether they're penetrating soil, rock or concrete and their use was mostly to cut the wing gashes, hence they didn't need to detonate on impact.
http://yankee451.com/2013/09/04/jassm-documentation/

The Airforce had at least 35 pilot production JASSMs before 9/11:
[qimg]http://yankee451.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/5-35-pilot-production-missiles.png[/qimg]

What part of "plans to acquire" is confusing to you?

Whence were the multiple JASSMs needed, launched?