I watched it about two years ago and I can't remember exactly where it was and I don't have time to look for the footage now.
So you want us to address evidence you can't be bothered to present? The phrase "Go fish" springs to mind.
Any truth-seeker will watch all the truther videos so he will know what the truther position is.
Life's too short. And there's no such thing as "the truther position" on anything at all except the date of 9/11. Are the hijackers alive, were they killed before the attacks, were they killed in the attacks, or did they never exist? Was it conventional explosives, thermite, nuclear weapons or energy beams from space that brought down the towers? Were the planes airliners, military planes disguised as airliners, holograms, real airliners with cloaing devices so they could appear to hit the towers then vanish, or completely nonexistent and unseen in reality and only ever seen in doctored television broadcasts? Was all the rubble turned to dust, was there molten steel in the rubble pile for weeks, or was all the steel shipped immediately to China before anyone could examine it? Did the Twin Towers fall at freefall speed, faster than freefall, slower than freefall but not slowly enough, or exactly as fast as would be expected but with some tiny features that don't quite agree with a vastly oversimplified collapse model? All of these sets of mutually contradictory hypothesis fragments are encompassed by what you blithely describe as "the truther position."
A reasonable person will watch a few truther videos, realise that (a) they all contradict each other, (b) quite a lot of them even contradict themselves, and (c) they grossly and blatantly misrepresent and distort the evidence, and will then decide that the whole thing is garbage. When presented with yet another garbage video to watch, the reasonable truth seeker will respond, "Why should I take this one seriously, when all the others are such crap?"
This is not, in general, a question truthers can answer satisfactorily.
Dave
