Merged No Planes At WTC (Split from: WTC Dust)

[SUSpilot]

I do not have an opinion. I know my high school buddy trained for years to become a pilot. He started out in small little Cesnas in high school, but did not graduate into jet planes until after college.

That's my only data point.

The principles of navigating on a clear day are the same for a jet as a Cessna. I suggest you ask your pal how long it took to learn cross-country pilotage. Then you'll have a significant data point. And you might be surprised at the answer.

EDIT: mis-typed something.

 

[Gamolon]

Nope. That a meat bird can destroy an aluminum wing of an airplane.

What do you mean "no"?

You are saying that steel is stronger than aluminum, therefore an aluminum plane couldn't penetrate the steel perimeter columns.

That means you believe that the strength of materials alone determines what can break/shear what.

So since a "meat" bird penetrated an aluminum wine, that means meat, using your logic, is stronger than aluminum. Otherwise, how would it penetrate the wing?

 

[Tinfoil Hater]

Are you another one of those people who think the planes should have bounced off?

Truthers can't can't be that stupid, can they?..

 

[WTC Dust]

HAHAHAHA
yes.

"Material Costs: Market Rate (fluctuates daily-call for quote)​

Aluminum= approximately $10/pound; varies per grade​

Steel=approximately $1.50/pound; varies per grade"​

Also the 14x14x.25 steel perimeter columns were 93% air.

HeeHeeHee

Are you saying that the WTC had really flimsy exterior walls? If so, that qualifies as a "weak building" bandaid.

 

[WTC Dust]

The principles of navigating on a clear day are the same for a jet as a Cessna. I suggest you ask your pal how long it took to learn cross-country pilotage. Then you'll have a significant data point. And you might be surprised at the answer.

EDIT: mis-typed something.

Until then, I guess it will remain a mystery. It will also remain a mystery as to why you think this is important, since there were no hijackings on 9/11.

 

[Loss Leader]

since there were no hijackings on 9/11.

Have you contacted the LA Kings' front office yet? I gave you their phone number just a bit upthread along with the identity of the two hockey scouts who were on UA 175.

You said you couldn't comment on the passengers on the plane because you knew nothing about them. I gave you information about them. Have you educated yourself on the issue?

 

[George 152]

The principles of navigating on a clear day are the same for a jet as a Cessna. I suggest you ask your pal how long it took to learn cross-country pilotage. Then you'll have a significant data point. And you might be surprised at the answer.

EDIT: mis-typed something.

Did my first dual crosscountry with a whole three hours under my belt and solo crosscountry with eight hours solo logged.

 

[Dash80]

Until then, I guess it will remain a mystery. It will also remain a mystery as to why you think this is important, since there were no hijackings on 9/11.

You keep saying that but you have yet to prove there were no hijackings.

You still live in NYC don't you? Perhaps you could speak to Patrick Welsh, my sister knows him and knew his wife Debbie. If he was ok with it, my sister could arrange a meeting for you. He knows his wife died on a hijacked aircraft on 9/11, her remains were identified.

I wouldn't normally encourage no-planers to bother victim's families but if they were to agree to talk, I guess that's ok.

Or you could arrange to speak to Mark Bingham's mother Alice Hoglan, she's met truthers before and was very dignified, calm and kind for taking the time to talk about her son and the things truthers have said about his phone call.

 

[Clayton Moore]

There are some VERY GOOD reasons to think that pre-placed explosives didn't destroy the WTC. But at least you don't insist that a plane also crashed into the WTC, as most of the architects and engineers for 9/11 truth do.

I call that the "planes plus bombs" theory, and it's ridiculous.

Yes. If you believe 9/11 then you must realize the most important part of the plot was to not get caught. Hijackers? What if they changed their mind or crashed the plane or if the pilot maydayed? What if they were intercepted?
Especially the so called Pentagon PLANE an hour after the tower attacks?

The towers were still rigged for a controlled demolition.

 

[twinstead]

Yes. If you believe 9/11 then you must realize the most important part of the plot was to not get caught. Hijackers? What if they changed their mind or crashed the plane or if the pilot maydayed? What if they were intercepted?
Especially the so called Pentagon PLANE an hour after the tower attacks?

The towers were still rigged for a controlled demolition.

Well. The battle of the ridiculous theories continues. Psst. Between you and me, your theory is slightly less idiotic.

Life's little victories, huh?

 

[Clayton Moore]

Yes. If you believe 9/11 then you must realize the most important part of the plot was to not get caught. Hijackers? What if they changed their mind or crashed the plane or if the pilot maydayed? What if they were intercepted?
Especially the so called Pentagon PLANE an hour after the tower attacks?

The towers were still rigged for a controlled demolition.

No matter how the towers went down the preliminary hijacking scenarios had to play without a hitch.

 

[Clayton Moore]

Yea, all you have to do is fly fully fuel laden jetliners into 2 of them at 500 miles per hour. Demolition problem solved

Or you could prepare/damage the buildings to the same degree and sit and wait.

 

[Dash80]

Yes. If you believe 9/11 then you must realize the most important part of the plot was to not get caught. Hijackers? What if they changed their mind or crashed the plane or if the pilot maydayed? What if they were intercepted?
Especially the so called Pentagon PLANE an hour after the tower attacks?

The towers were still rigged for a controlled demolition.

The hijackers were determined to kill people, including themselves. If they failed to hit their targets they would still kill the passengers, like flight 93. If fighter jets were forced into shooting them down there would still be casualties.

Hang on, didn't flight 77 crash at around 9:38, that is not an hour after. Flight 11 hit the North tower at 8:46, nobody knew for sure there would be other planes crashing at that point. Flight 175 hit the south tower at 9:03. So that's 35 minutes not one hour.

Got any proof the towers were rigged?

 

[twinstead]

Or you could prepare/damage the buildings to the same degree and sit and wait.

And exactly how would that be accomplished? I suspect the only reason you're a (giggle) no planer is so you can ignore any evidence of plane impacts and come up with some cockamamie theory about how that structural and fire damage was duplicated.

but I may be wrong because you haven't done that..

 

[Jack by the hedge]

No matter how the towers went down the preliminary hijacking scenarios had to play without a hitch.

That's an odd way to put it, but fair enough: in order to crash hijacked planes, first you must hijack some planes. I think the bad guys would have been more than content if they'd siezed one plane. As it turned out, their luck held and they got all four. They even managed to keep control of three.

 

[Dash80]

No matter how the towers went down the preliminary hijacking scenarios had to play without a hitch.

Or not bother with any plane "story" at all, just blow the buildings up and blame OBL for it anyway.

 

[Resume]

The towers were still rigged for a controlled demolition.

Because you say so?

 

[WTC Dust]

Have you contacted the LA Kings' front office yet? I gave you their phone number just a bit upthread along with the identity of the two hockey scouts who were on UA 175.

You said you couldn't comment on the passengers on the plane because you knew nothing about them. I gave you information about them. Have you educated yourself on the issue?

No. I don't do independent plane research. I don't study planes at all. The only reason I talk about planes is because you people bring it up.

Planes didn't destroy the WTC, so there's no reason to study planes. If the whole plane story turns out to be true, it doesn't affect my work.

 

[Resume]

Until then, I guess it will remain a mystery. It will also remain a mystery as to why you think this is important, since there were no hijackings on 9/11.

There are a number of folks who can help you get in touch with the relatives of those who died as a result of those hijackings. I would very much like to read about such an interaction.

If it was a certain wavelength of energy, maybe nothing. Maybe it would fry you. It all depends on the nature of the beam.

What beam, where? Can you point out such a weapon, or the available technology?

No. I don't do independent plane research. I don't study planes at all. The only reason I talk about planes is because you people bring it up.

Planes didn't destroy the WTC, so there's no reason to study planes. If the whole plane story turns out to be true, it doesn't affect my work.

What work?

 

[WTC Dust]

You keep saying that but you have yet to prove there were no hijackings.

You still live in NYC don't you? Perhaps you could speak to Patrick Welsh, my sister knows him and knew his wife Debbie. If he was ok with it, my sister could arrange a meeting for you. He knows his wife died on a hijacked aircraft on 9/11, her remains were identified.

I wouldn't normally encourage no-planers to bother victim's families but if they were to agree to talk, I guess that's ok.

Or you could arrange to speak to Mark Bingham's mother Alice Hoglan, she's met truthers before and was very dignified, calm and kind for taking the time to talk about her son and the things truthers have said about his phone call.

It's almost impossible to prove that something didn't happen, so I don't usually try. If you think there were hijackings, good for you. Moving on.