International Skeptics Forum

International Skeptics Forum (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumindex.php)
-   9/11 Conspiracy Theories (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=64)
-   -   9/11: How they Faked the Videos (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=341275)

Robin 15th January 2020 04:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robin (Post 12953105)
Let's do a thought experiment. We have a length of square section steel and a sheet of aluminium, cut and bent so that it forms a snug sleeve around three sides of the full length of the steel.

We put it in a good strong vice with the uncovered side to the back and take a large heavy crowbar and take the strongest whack we can at the front face.

Would we have to sever the aluminium completely in order to do considerable damage on the steel bar inside?

No of course we wouldn't. Same thing applies to the column in question.

Bumping and hilighting the part yankee451 missed.

Robin 15th January 2020 05:02 AM

I think I have some old roof sections in the garage and some square section steel, so if I have time I may try it out.

According to this theory as long as I cover the steel with aluminium on three sides I can't dent the steel unless I sever the aluminium all the way through. Interesting theory.

turingtest 15th January 2020 05:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave Rogers (Post 12954708)
Ah, but he's carefully avoided having to do that by claiming that it's the unrecorded witness accounts that refer to small planes. It's the evidentiary equivalent of "the lurkers support me in e-mail".

Dave

And he's already insulated himself from having to confront any actual recorded witnesses with this-

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12941110)
Quote:

Most people immediately discount missiles because they assume thousands of people would have seen them, and would have reported them to the authorities. This is a circular argument because if missiles were used, then they would have been launched by the authorities the witnesses would have reported them to.
https://911crashtest.org/9-11-truth-...e-shaped-hole/

It's the evidentiary equivalent of Michel H's "credibility rating" in his Telepath Test thread; note that the circular argument he accuses other people of using is actually the one he makes because he so desperately needs it.

If Michael Shermer ever decides to update "Why People Believe Weird Things," yankee can be an illustrative example of the ways those weird beliefs are maintained. Yankee wants to be famous as the guy whose serious study broke the case; all he's ever actually going to achieve is fame as a serious case study.

Jack by the hedge 15th January 2020 05:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JSanderO (Post 12954753)
Hard to tell what the material Steve claims is alum siding weirdly displaced actually is. It actually looks different in the ellipse. But the res is so low it's really hard to read. Perhaps a slab of insulation?

It is hard to make out quite what it is (quite aside from any daft stuff about missiles). The photos from two angles show that it's not in front of a column, and it projects quite a long way out from the wall. It's not clear how it's attached to the building but we don't know for sure what shape it is so there might be more of it sticking into the building. What it looks most like is the section of cladding from the column to its left and it's possible that it's not quite broken off at the bottom, but if it is a ragged piece of not-quite-torn-off cladding, why did it end up sticking up instead of dangling downward? Was it initially pushed in and then flung almost out again?

DuvalHMFIC 15th January 2020 06:38 AM

So this guy (Yankee), sees one anomaly, in one photo, and throws the baby out with the bath water. Let's throw him a bone and say this ONE column is "suspect." So we throw out EVERY other piece of evidence, and conjure up a grand conspiracy involving fake videos, fake witnesses, fake firefighters and policemen...I could go on. Because there's ONE suspect column in ONE photo. Which, ironically enough, should be one of the "faked" photos.

How braindead can people be?

And that brings us back to page 1. Why not just fly ******* airplanes into the buildings?

Robin 15th January 2020 06:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack by the hedge (Post 12954784)
It is hard to make out quite what it is (quite aside from any daft stuff about missiles). The photos from two angles show that it's not in front of a column, and it projects quite a long way out from the wall. It's not clear how it's attached to the building but we don't know for sure what shape it is so there might be more of it sticking into the building. What it looks most like is the section of cladding from the column to its left and it's possible that it's not quite broken off at the bottom, but if it is a ragged piece of not-quite-torn-off cladding, why did it end up sticking up instead of dangling downward? Was it initially pushed in and then flung almost out again?

If it is a part of the cladding sticking out then it pretty much kills the cruise missile theory stone dead. Yankee451 is steadfastly ignoring that.

Jack by the hedge 15th January 2020 07:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robin (Post 12954848)
If it is a part of the cladding sticking out then it pretty much kills the cruise missile theory stone dead. Yankee451 is steadfastly ignoring that.

True, but can we prove it's not a cruise missile wing instead?

Leftus 15th January 2020 07:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12954671)
Nope. You didn't. You see, the cladding covered the column on three sides. for a plane wing to so damage the column the cladding was attached to, it would first need to cut through the cladding. Back to the drawing board for you!

https://911crashtest.org/wp-content/...s-1024x640.png

What leads you to believe that the wing of a missile is constructed of more sturdy material, or somehow differently, than that of an airplane?

How many missile system have you personally interacted with?

Leftus 15th January 2020 07:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DuvalHMFIC (Post 12954833)
So this guy (Yankee), sees one anomaly, in one photo, and throws the baby out with the bath water. Let's throw him a bone and say this ONE column is "suspect." So we throw out EVERY other piece of evidence, and conjure up a grand conspiracy involving fake videos, fake witnesses, fake firefighters and policemen...I could go on. Because there's ONE suspect column in ONE photo. Which, ironically enough, should be one of the "faked" photos.

How braindead can people be?

And that brings us back to page 1. Why not just fly ******* airplanes into the buildings?

Kill thousands in the towers? Not a problem. Kill a few hundred passengers and crew? We are not monsters.

carlitos 15th January 2020 08:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12954690)
Yes, those that reported small planes, missiles and bombs might have been onto something.

What about the ones who reported trains?

Quote:

Nicholas Borrillo -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.) on 23rd floor of North Tower:
Then we heard a rumble. We heard it and we felt the whole building shake. It was like being on a train, being in an earthquake. A train is more like it, because with the train you hear the rumbling, and it kind of like moved you around in the hall.

Paul Curran -- Fire Patrolman (F.D.N.Y.) North Tower:
I went back and stood right in front of Eight World Trade Center right by the customs house, and the north tower was set right next to it. Not that much time went by, and all of a sudden the ground just started shaking. It felt like a train was running under my feet.

Joseph Fortis -- E.M.T. (E.M.S.) T]he ground started shaking like a train was coming. You looked up, and I guess -- I don't know, it was one that came down first or two? Which one?

Keith Murphy -- (F.D.N.Y.) [Engine 47] ...... I would say about 3, 4 seconds, all of a sudden this tremendous roar. It sounded like being in a tunnel with the train coming at you.

Timothy Julian -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.) [Ladder 118] You know, and I just heard like an explosion and then cracking type of noise, and then it sounded like a freight train, rumbling and picking up speed, and I remember I looked up, and I saw it coming down.

yankee451 15th January 2020 08:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by carlitos (Post 12954955)
What about the ones who reported trains?

Alas, the conclusion that planes, trains and automobiles were responsible, doesn't fit the evidence as well as the lateral impact of multiple cruise missiles does.

beachnut 15th January 2020 08:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12954965)
Alas, the conclusion that planes, trains and automobiles were responsible, doesn't fit the evidence as well as the lateral impact of multiple cruise missiles does.

Doesn't fit the evidence? that is funny
Only in your fantasy world where you can't figure out physics due to "common sense". TLAR does not always work in the real world where math and physics rule.

Stop spreading on of the top dumbest claims about 9/11, missiles did it, it does not make sense, and is a big lie.

Leftus 15th January 2020 08:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12954965)
Alas, the conclusion that planes, trains and automobiles were responsible, doesn't fit the evidence as well as the lateral impact of multiple cruise missiles does.

Cruise missiles don't do lateral impacts. In fact, they are designed to avoid it. The targeting and flight systems are written to avoid obstacles. So now, not only do you need a missile system that didn't fully exist, and quite a few of them and all must work flawlessly, but you need a rewritten software.


And to you, this is a more likely answer than what can be visually confirmed as Boeing 767s hitting the twin towers.

Regnad Kcin 15th January 2020 10:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12950381)
I understand quite well. I also understand mostly hollow aluminum wings don't slice through steel skyscrapers in the real world...

I note the subtle connotative usage of hollow (empty, weak) and steel (strong, hard) employed to help game the argument, such as it is.

One could argue the towers were quite hollow, too.

Regnad Kcin 15th January 2020 10:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12950392)
Occupants of what? The non existent planes? The empty offices? What do you mean?

A no-planer, are we? Iíll leave this discussion right after entering it, then; I have no interest in arguing with insanity.

smartcooky 15th January 2020 12:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cosmic Yak (Post 12954702)
Unsurprisingly, this does not answer my question.
You claim the images and videos were altered to mask the missiles.
You are using the same images to prove that missiles were used.
Why would the Evil Them not alter the images to show damage from a plane, instead of leaving in damage that an unqualified amateur like you can easily spot?
Not much of an Evil Plan, is it?

Steve wouldn't know an Evil Plan if Dick Dastardly himself fell out of the sky, landed on the stool in front of his grand piano and started playing "Evil Plans are Here Again"

BStrong 15th January 2020 12:17 PM

Originally Posted by yankee451 View Post
I understand quite well. I also understand mostly hollow aluminum wings don't slice through steel skyscrapers in the real world...

Your no-plane theory has just as much to do with the real world as a Marvel comic book.

smartcooky 15th January 2020 12:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave Rogers (Post 12954764)
And yet it turns out that my son doesn't have a big hole in the sole of his boot. Funny how so many of these truther laws of physics don't apply to everyday situations, yet absolutely, definitely must apply to the events of 9/11. It's almost as if they were making up new physics as they go along.

Dave

"Almost"?

smartcooky 15th January 2020 12:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BStrong (Post 12955218)
Originally Posted by yankee451 View Post
I understand quite well. I also understand mostly hollow aluminum wings don't slice through steel skyscrapers in the real world...

Your no-plane theory has just as much to do with the real world as a Marvel comic book.



Yep, his "mostly hollow aluminum wings don't slice through steel skyscrapers" in exactly the same way, that mostly hollow ping ping balls don't punch a hole in a table tennis bat.

oh, wait!

bknight 15th January 2020 12:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by smartcooky (Post 12955235)
Yep, his "mostly hollow aluminum wings don't slice through steel skyscrapers" in exactly the same way, that mostly hollow ping ping balls don't punch a hole in a table tennis bat.

oh, wait!

New physics, Dr. Strangelove. ;)

beachnut 15th January 2020 01:13 PM

Hollow wings (w/66,000 lbs of fuel) meet hollow WTC, 95% air.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12950381)
... I also understand mostly hollow aluminum wings don't slice through steel skyscrapers in the real world, ...

Hollow aircraft hits hollow WTC. You can't rent a solid steel concrete building, thus the WTC is 95 percent air. Whereas your lie of hollow wings are actually filled with 66,000 pounds of fuel going 590 mph. You can't grasp physics due to a complete lack of knowledge on the subject at hand.

Are the engines hollow? Have you studied the landing gear of aircraft for what they are made of?

It is ironic you used the term "real world" in your fantasy world of "missiles did it". Classic woo.

smartcooky 15th January 2020 01:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bknight (Post 12955275)
New physics, Dr. Strangelove. ;)


https://www.dropbox.com/s/pmqhn7gwbv...nuke.gif?raw=1
YEE HAWWW!!!

bknight 15th January 2020 02:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by smartcooky (Post 12955305)

Yep. :)

Leftus 15th January 2020 03:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12950392)
Occupants of what? The non existent planes? The empty offices? What do you mean?

There were flight manifests for those planes you say didn't exist. They had real peoples names on them. Friends and families are mourning those who are on those lists. Those people whose existence and memories you spit on to advance your theory. Pilots, flight crew, passengers. All GONE. What happened to them in your theory?

abaddon 15th January 2020 03:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12954965)
Alas, the conclusion that planes, trains and automobiles were responsible, doesn't fit the evidence as well as the lateral impact of multiple cruise missiles does.

Really? Even when cruise missiles are not capable of the crap you propose? Somehow, cruise missile are capable of magic?

Off you go to Hogwarts to learn quidditch. That is just as plausible.

beachnut 15th January 2020 03:20 PM

ignoring murdered Americans, true colors come out (not the first time)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12950392)
Occupants of what? The non existent planes? The empty offices? What do you mean?

Thousands murdered on 9/11 and you make up a sick fantasy.

Tell your grandkids you mock the murder of thousands.

Deadie 15th January 2020 03:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leftus (Post 12955438)
Those people whose existence and memories you spit on to advance your theory. Pilots, flight crew, passengers. All GONE. What happened to them in your theory?

He's gonna say:

1. They didn't exist.
2. They are conspirators and in on the plan in some capacity (crisis actors).
3. They were executed after their flights landed at secret airports shortly after takeoff. However, I do not know if he thinks those specific planes or particular flights ever existed in the first place.
4. Some combination of the above on a person to person basis.

Regnad Kcin 15th January 2020 03:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12950887)
No. You saw it on television, therefore you assume thousands of people saw it. But the lightly damaged aluminum sheeting, and the sharply bent steel columns, say otherwise.

“Assume thousands of people?”

The population of the five boroughs in 2001 was a touch over eight million. Following the impact of the first airplane, there was time for more than a few of them, even those at work or otherwise not usually looking at the twin towers (plus tourists, students, workers and other non residents either on foot, on ships, or in vehicles) to be hard focused on the spot. Maybe you’ve never been to NYC; I lived there, and the towers were a common visual reference for a remarkable distance, that’s how tall they were.

But let’s be conservative and consider just those within a modest radius of, say, a half mile. I assume more than a million.

BStrong 15th January 2020 03:59 PM

Yank when are going to get around to answering this post:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...&postcount=658

You remember, the one where I listed a series of U.S. military crimes that were reported by the participants involved?

The post that asked you about who the humans were that would have to be involved in your fatasy construct?

You are making the mistake of ****** science fiction writers by focusing on tech and ignoring the fact that every story is ultimately about humans, not technology.

You must come up with something more than "they" if you want to get into the big leagues.

yankee451 15th January 2020 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by beachnut (Post 12955453)
Thousands murdered on 9/11 and you make up a sick fantasy.

Tell your grandkids you mock the murder of thousands.

Be outraged! It's easier than thinking.

Robin 15th January 2020 04:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robin (Post 12954725)
So what you are saying is, that if I take a steel square section and cut and bend a sheet of aluminium to snugly fit the length of steel on three sides and then I swing a big crowbar at the front side then I would not be able to dent the steel without severing the aluminium completely? Yes?

When you get a chance, yankee451...

yankee451 15th January 2020 04:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robin (Post 12955505)
When you get a chance, yankee451...

Yeah, I saw it. Thanks.

Robin 15th January 2020 04:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12955509)
Yeah, I saw it. Thanks.

Do you have a response?

curious cat 15th January 2020 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Regnad Kcin (Post 12955490)
ďAssume thousands of people?Ē

The population of the five boroughs in 2001 was a touch over eight million. Following the impact of the first airplane, there was time for more than a few of them, even those at work or otherwise not usually looking at the twin towers (plus tourists, students, workers and other non residents either on foot, on ships, or in vehicles) to be hard focused on the spot. Maybe youíve never been to NYC; I lived there, and the towers were a common visual reference for a remarkable distance, thatís how tall they were.

But letís be conservative and consider just those within a modest radius of, say, a half mile. I assume more than a million.

One example how people react to some kind of disaster is this quote from article about a Granville railway accident (Australia) in 1977:

"By 08:50, 1500 people lined the cutting. The crowd spilled onto the tracks. Some disguised themselves as rescue workers and climbed onto the unstable bridge wreckage for a closer look, risking the lives of trapped passengers and their rescuers beneath."

And that was just a railway accident with about 80 fatalities... 1,500 people just in the immediate vicinity of the scene! What happened in NY was a spectacle of a lifetime that nobody was likely to miss unless he had something vitally important to do at that moment. I think your estimate is quite reasonable.

Regnad Kcin 15th January 2020 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Axxman300 (Post 12951317)
Yup. I'm done with this thread, it will end up being merged with his other moderated thread and die the appropriate death it deserves.

I stopped by, gazed in awe (this nonsense is STILL being run up the flagpole nearly 20 years after?!), made my little comment and withdrew. Then shortly thereafter I came back, suggesting my self discipline needs some work.

Anyway, best wishes to 9/11 truthers; everybody needs a hobby.

yankee451 15th January 2020 04:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by curious cat (Post 12955514)
One example how people react to some kind of disaster is this quote from article about a Granville railway accident (Australia) in 1977:

"By 08:50, 1500 people lined the cutting. The crowd spilled onto the tracks. Some disguised themselves as rescue workers and climbed onto the unstable bridge wreckage for a closer look, risking the lives of trapped passengers and their rescuers beneath."

And that was just a railway accident with about 80 fatalities... 1,500 people just in the immediate vicinity of the scene! What happened in NY was a spectacle of a lifetime that nobody was likely to miss unless he had something vitally important to do at that moment. I think your estimate is quite reasonable.

I see. So this changes the evidence of the lateral impact of cruise missiles, how? Perhaps thousands of people did report seeing missiles, but why would the media tell us about it when they were selling us planes? Like all my questions you don't need to answer.

yankee451 15th January 2020 04:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Regnad Kcin (Post 12955515)
I stopped by, gazed in awe (this nonsense is STILL being run up the flagpole nearly 20 years after?!), made my little comment and withdrew. Then shortly thereafter I came back, suggesting my self discipline needs some work.

Anyway, best wishes to 9/11 truthers; everybody needs a hobby.

Almost 20 years later and some people can still remember the lies that got the world into its current mess. You can go back to examining your navel now.

yankee451 15th January 2020 04:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leftus (Post 12954891)
Kill thousands in the towers? Not a problem. Kill a few hundred passengers and crew? We are not monsters.



Ignore the evidence? That's what we do.
~"Skeptics"

Robin 15th January 2020 04:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12955524)
Ignore the evidence? That's what we do.
~"Skeptics"

You are doing a good job of ignoring my question which is directly about the evidence.

Deadie 15th January 2020 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12955519)
I see. So this changes the evidence of the lateral impact of cruise missiles, how?

You do not have prima facie evidence. You have ad hoc speculation based on nothing more than your person interpretation of photographs.

Photographs I'm surprised you don't consider to be photoshopped or otherwise manipulated. Hell, what exactly IS your justification that those photos you use to argue your point are in any way legitimate in the first place, given that you claim video evidence not?

yankee451 15th January 2020 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robin (Post 12955529)
You are doing a good job of ignoring my question which is directly about the evidence.

Use this for your hypothetical thought experiment.

http://yankee451.com/wp-content/uplo...1-48-16-PM.png

yankee451 15th January 2020 04:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deadie (Post 12955531)
You do not have prima facie evidence. You have ad hoc speculation based on nothing more than your person interpretation of photographs.

Photographs I'm surprised you don't consider to be photoshopped or otherwise manipulated. Hell, what exactly IS your justification that those photos you use to argue your point are in any way legitimate in the first place, given that you claim video evidence not?

I see. So you think the photographs of all the damage evidence was doctored to make it look like the lateral impact of small projectiles, rather than what they were showing on television. Your logic gives me chills.

beachnut 15th January 2020 04:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12955501)
Be outraged! It's easier than thinking.

Why would I be outraged about someone making up the dumbest lies lies, and mock the murder of thousands.

Who did your fantasy version of 9/11?

You can't grasp physics.

I was on active duty on 9/11 and find your claims to be false, and an insult to all Americans. You live in a fantasy world based on ignorance and hate of others, and those who died on 9/11.

Robin 15th January 2020 04:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12955536)
Use this for your hypothetical thought experiment.

You will do anything to avoid answering my question, won't you?

I could do it for real, but I want to find out what you think would happen.

You are saying that unless the aluminium cladding is sliced all the way through, including the parts around the sides, there won't be any damage to the steel square section?

(Edit: I can add a layer of fire retardant between my aluminium and steel if you like, just name the material)

beachnut 15th January 2020 04:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12955536)
Use this for your hypothetical thought experiment. ...

Here you go a few of the thousands killed on 9/11, and you make up lies about missiles.

Vincent Paul Abate, 40, Brooklyn, N.Y., Cantor Fitzgerald, World Trade Center.

Laurence Christopher Abel, 37, New York City, Cantor Fitzgerald, World Trade Center.

Alona Abraham, 30, Ashdod, Israel, Passenger, United 175, World Trade Center.

William F. Abrahamson, 55, Westchester County, N.Y., Marsh&McLennan Companies, Inc., World Trade Center.

Richard Anthony Aceto, 42, Marsh&McLennan Companies, Inc., World Trade Center.

Heinrich Bernhard Ackermann, 38, Aon Corporation, World Trade Center.

Paul Acquaviva, 29, Glen Rock, N.J., Cantor Fitzgerald, World Trade Center.

Christian Adams, 37, Passenger, United 93, Shanksville, Pa.

Donald LaRoy Adams, 28, Cantor Fitzgerald, World Trade Center.

Lives ended by 19 failed humans who hated American, and you make up lies.


And here some at the end of the alphabet...

Zhe Zeng, 28, Bank of New York, World Trade Center.

Marc Scott Zeplin, 33, Westchester, N.Y., Cantor Fitzgerald, World Trade Center.

Jie Yao Justin Zhao, 27, New York City, CompuCom Systems, Inc., World Trade Center.

Yuguang Zheng, Passenger, American 77, Pentagon.

Ivelin Ziminski, 41, Tarrytown, N.Y., Marsh&McLennan Companies, Inc., World Trade Center.

Michael Joseph Zinzi, 37, Newfoundland, N.J., Marsh&McLennan Companies, Inc., World Trade Center.

Charles Alan Zion, 54, Greenwich, Conn., Cantor Fitzgerald, World Trade Center.

Julie Lynne Zipper, 44, Paramus, N.J., Sandler O'Neill visitor from SunGard Data Systems, Inc., World Trade Center.

Salvatore J. Zisa, 45, Hawthorne, N.J., Marsh&McLennan Companies, Inc., World Trade Center.

Prokopios Paul Zois, 46, Lynbrook, N.Y., Marsh&McLennan consultant from American Express, World Trade Center.

Joseph J. Zuccala, 54, Croton-on-Hudson, N.Y., Fuji Bank, Ltd., World Trade Center.

Andrew Steven Zucker, 27, Riverdale, N.Y., Harris Beach LLP, World Trade Center.

Igor Zukelman, 29, Fiduciary Trust Company International, World Trade Center.


Tell me, have you told all those who knew these people, their parents, family, kids, that you know the truth?

Did you try to confirm those who were killed before spreading the dumbest lie in history? You failed to prove the videos are fake - FAILED

Deadie 15th January 2020 04:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12955538)
I see. So you think the photographs of all the damage evidence was doctored to make it look like the lateral impact of small projectiles, rather than what they were showing on television. Your logic gives me chills.

What? No, if I was going to expend the time, effort and energy to create fantastically amazing CGI versions of events depicting aircraft striking the towers then I sure as hell would also manipulate, or outright create, still photographic evidence to the same effect.

Deadie 15th January 2020 05:08 PM

I ask again:

What exactly is your justification that those photos you use to argue your point are in any way legitimate in the first place, given that you claim video evidence not?

Robin 15th January 2020 05:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12955536)
Use this for your hypothetical thought experiment.

http://yankee451.com/wp-content/uplo...1-48-16-PM.png

You think that the wing would exert no force on the steel column unless it has "passed through" any intervening material?

Think again

Robin 15th January 2020 05:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robin (Post 12954725)
So what you are saying is, that if I take a steel square section and cut and bend a sheet of aluminium to snugly fit the length of steel on three sides and then I swing a big crowbar at the front side then I would not be able to dent the steel without severing the aluminium completely? Yes?

Bumping again one of the questions yankee451 is studiously avoiding.

yankee451 15th January 2020 05:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robin (Post 12955574)
Bumping again one of the questions yankee451 is studiously avoiding.

The box wasn't square, was it.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:31 AM.

Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2015-20, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.