Or it's like being expected to believe that there was a third plane which hit the towers because as was shown in the naudet documentary a port authority employee states that they have received a warning that a third plane was on it's way in.
By this logic we should be able to claim that the actual collapse of at least one tower was due to this third plane which someone, somewhere reported as being on it's way.
People make mistakes and comments get mis-heard, distorted and mis-reported in the chaos of the incident. But many hours after the attack, when things have started to settle down and rational thought processes are possible once again, the testimony of eyewitnesses regarding the condition of a damaged structure which they might be expected to have to enter is much more reliable than the altered perception of eyewitnesses caught up in the adrenaline rush of an attack in progress and perceiving bangs and crashes as 'explosions' or running with misheard or misunderstood rumours about secondary devices.
By this logic we should be able to claim that the actual collapse of at least one tower was due to this third plane which someone, somewhere reported as being on it's way.
People make mistakes and comments get mis-heard, distorted and mis-reported in the chaos of the incident. But many hours after the attack, when things have started to settle down and rational thought processes are possible once again, the testimony of eyewitnesses regarding the condition of a damaged structure which they might be expected to have to enter is much more reliable than the altered perception of eyewitnesses caught up in the adrenaline rush of an attack in progress and perceiving bangs and crashes as 'explosions' or running with misheard or misunderstood rumours about secondary devices.
