Bumping and hilighting the part yankee451 missed.

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.

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

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.

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?

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?

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?

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?

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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"

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.

"Almost"?

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. ;)

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

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.

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

Yep. :)

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?

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.

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

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

Tell your grandkids you mock the murder of thousands.

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.

“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.

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.

Be outraged! It's easier than thinking.

When you get a chance, yankee451...

Yeah, I saw it. Thanks.

Do you have a response?

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 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.

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.

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.

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.

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?