[Moderated] What Caused the Plane Shaped Hole

yankee451 · 8th January 2014, 12:48 AM

In this video I examine the North Tower impact damage on 9/11, allegedly caused by American Airlines Flight 11.

The damage evidence eliminates explosives alone as being the cause, and at the same time it eliminates a Boeing 767 or a reinforced jet of any kind. The video also dispenses with the hologram nonsense and pokes fun at the “mini-nuke” crowd as well as pokes a finger in the eye of the Judy Wood clique.

http://yankee451.com/2014/01/07/cut-...e-episode-one/

Transcript here:
http://yankee451.com/2014/01/07/cut-...e-episode-one/

threadworm · 8th January 2014, 01:10 AM

A plane.

alienentity · 8th January 2014, 01:30 AM

So how were they to be certain the jet would impact at precisely the points it did? That's some awesome precision flying....

Iamme · 8th January 2014, 01:44 AM

Originally Posted by threadworm

A plane.

Yeah. Makes one wonder why they didnt think of that.
I got my chuckle reading your response. Lol

ozeco41 · 8th January 2014, 01:45 AM

Whilst ever we see idiotic claims like

Quote:

...we see a carefully prepared impact area with strategically removed bolts and floors.

we can be assured that no one will take truthers seriously.

Iamme · 8th January 2014, 01:49 AM

Originally Posted by yankee451

In this video I examine the North Tower impact damage on 9/11, allegedly caused by American Airlines Flight 11.

The damage evidence eliminates explosives alone as being the cause, and at the same time it eliminates a Boeing 767 or a reinforced jet of any kind. The video also dispenses with the hologram nonsense and pokes fun at the “mini-nuke” crowd as well as pokes a finger in the eye of the Judy Wood clique.

http://yankee451.com/2014/01/07/cut-...e-episode-one/

Transcript here:
http://yankee451.com/2014/01/07/cut-...e-episode-one/

So the damage evidence eliminates a jet? or just the specific types of jets you list?
Is this for real?

yankee451 · 8th January 2014, 02:08 AM

Originally Posted by Iamme

So the damage evidence eliminates a jet? or just the specific types of jets you list?
Is this for real?

Why, what kind of jet were you thinking of?

Craig4 · 8th January 2014, 02:17 AM

Originally Posted by yankee451

In this video I examine the North Tower impact damage on 9/11, allegedly caused by American Airlines Flight 11.

The damage evidence eliminates explosives alone as being the cause, and at the same time it eliminates a Boeing 767 or a reinforced jet of any kind. The video also dispenses with the hologram nonsense and pokes fun at the “mini-nuke” crowd as well as pokes a finger in the eye of the Judy Wood clique.

http://yankee451.com/2014/01/07/cut-...e-episode-one/

Transcript here:
http://yankee451.com/2014/01/07/cut-...e-episode-one/

You're really going to need to show your work on this one.

yankee451 · 8th January 2014, 02:18 AM

Originally Posted by Craig4

You're really going to need to show your work on this one.

Already have. You're really going to need to watch the video.

Craig4 · 8th January 2014, 02:23 AM

Originally Posted by yankee451

Why, what kind of jet were you thinking of?

What I don't understand is why you think, death rays, controlled demolition, missiles, holograms and what you believe aren't all the same thing. Your irrational belief is neither better nor worse than the other truthers.

Craig4 · 8th January 2014, 02:29 AM

Originally Posted by yankee451

Already have. You're really going to need to watch the video.

I started to but it became quickly apparent that your work isn't good enough to bother with.

Mudcat · 8th January 2014, 02:34 AM

A Boeing 757. [/thread]

Craig4 · 8th January 2014, 02:40 AM

Originally Posted by yankee451

Why, what kind of jet were you thinking of?

The kind you showed in the video, you know, the one impacting the freaking building. What the hell other kind of jet could it be? Seriously, the fact that no other jet is in the damn video rules out every other kind of jet in existence. Why is this hard for you?

Kid Eager · 8th January 2014, 03:05 AM

Not this crap again.

Start with a conclusion and come up with a convoluted scenario to explain the already arrived at conclusion. Ignore any evidence that disagrees with conclusion, don't care about absence of evidence to support own conclusion.

Rinse, lather repeat. Create random video, as this is how one does good research and analysis, as every detective and scientist knows...

Have piña colada. Mission accomplished.

cjnewson88 · 8th January 2014, 03:37 AM

Originally Posted by Mudcat

A Boeing 757. [/thread]

767*

Planes hit the towers. Get the **** over it yankee.

/Thread

LSSBB · 8th January 2014, 05:13 AM

Originally Posted by Kid Eager

Not this crap again.

Start with a conclusion and come up with a convoluted scenario to explain the already arrived at conclusion. Ignore any evidence that disagrees with conclusion, don't care about absence of evidence to support own conclusion.

Rinse, lather repeat. Create random video, as this is how one does good research and analysis, as every detective and scientist knows...

Have piña colada. Mission accomplished.

+1.

thedopefishlives · 8th January 2014, 05:36 AM

Originally Posted by cjnewson88

767*

Planes hit the towers. Get the **** over it yankee.

/Thread

Quoted for truth.

Mark F · 8th January 2014, 06:29 AM

Originally Posted by yankee451

In this video I examine the North Tower impact damage on 9/11, allegedly caused by American Airlines Flight 11.

The damage evidence eliminates explosives alone as being the cause, and at the same time it eliminates a Boeing 767 or a reinforced jet of any kind. The video also dispenses with the hologram nonsense and pokes fun at the “mini-nuke” crowd as well as pokes a finger in the eye of the Judy Wood clique.

http://yankee451.com/2014/01/07/cut-...e-episode-one/

Transcript here:
http://yankee451.com/2014/01/07/cut-...e-episode-one/

Move along people, nothing to see here.

alfaniner · 8th January 2014, 08:24 AM

Quote:

What Caused the Plane Shaped Hole

The plane! The plane!

Spindrift · 8th January 2014, 08:30 AM

How do you know that the video you're watching is running forwards? What if it's running backwards and the plane is actually being expelled from the building? They secretly built a 757 inside the tower and used super-thermite to blast it out the building. That would take care of the hologram nonsense as well. Bet you never thought of that.

Animal · 8th January 2014, 08:45 AM

Originally Posted by cjnewson88

767*

Planes hit the towers. Get the **** over it yankee.

/Thread

Yep.

It is also amazing that after 12+ years, troofers can;t tell the difference between steel columns and aluminum cladding

Jrrarglblarg · 8th January 2014, 08:46 AM

Originally Posted by yankee451

I
Transcript here:
http://yankee451.com/2014/01/07/cut-...e-episode-one/

I refuse to watch youtub videos anymore, so thanks for providing the transcript.

In it you assert:

Quote:

Now when we look at the gash we don’t see a plane-shaped gash and a random pile of twisted metal, we see a carefully prepared impact area with strategically removed bolts and floors. We noticed that almost all the “wing” damage was directional, but not in the direction the wings were traveling. 767 wings are swept-back about 30 degrees which would mean they would strike in a wedge motion, with the wings sawing from the inside out, from fuselage to wing-tips. The fuselage would strike first, and then would come the wings at the wing roots, followed by the engines and finally the wing tips. Had this happened the damage would reflect it – but it doesn’t.

Your final statement, placed at the bottom of a paragraph where a conclusion would normally be found, does not appear to have any support in the paragraph. Would you please elaborate on this point for me and, with out insisting I watch your video, please present the facts you used to reach this (a priori) conclusion?

NoahFence · 8th January 2014, 09:04 AM

Originally Posted by yankee451

In this video I examine the North Tower impact damage on 9/11, allegedly caused by American Airlines Flight 11.

The damage evidence eliminates explosives alone as being the cause, and at the same time it eliminates a Boeing 767 or a reinforced jet of any kind. The video also dispenses with the hologram nonsense and pokes fun at the “mini-nuke” crowd as well as pokes a finger in the eye of the Judy Wood clique.

http://yankee451.com/2014/01/07/cut-...e-episode-one/

Transcript here:
http://yankee451.com/2014/01/07/cut-...e-episode-one/

Feel free to PM me so as not to out yourself, but what exactly do you people stand to gain by posting this easily debunked crap?

Mark F · 8th January 2014, 09:22 AM

Originally Posted by yankee451

In this video I examine the North Tower impact damage on 9/11, allegedly caused by American Airlines Flight 11.

The damage evidence eliminates explosives alone as being the cause, and at the same time it eliminates a Boeing 767 or a reinforced jet of any kind. The video also dispenses with the hologram nonsense and pokes fun at the “mini-nuke” crowd as well as pokes a finger in the eye of the Judy Wood clique.

http://yankee451.com/2014/01/07/cut-...e-episode-one/

Transcript here:
http://yankee451.com/2014/01/07/cut-...e-episode-one/

So it should look like this?

Does that thinking sort of remind of you of this?

Peter May · 8th January 2014, 09:24 AM

Originally Posted by yankee451

In this video I examine the North Tower impact damage on 9/11, allegedly caused by American Airlines Flight 11.

The damage evidence eliminates explosives alone as being the cause, and at the same time it eliminates a Boeing 767 or a reinforced jet of any kind. The video also dispenses with the hologram nonsense and pokes fun at the “mini-nuke” crowd as well as pokes a finger in the eye of the Judy Wood clique.

http://yankee451.com/2014/01/07/cut-...e-episode-one/

Transcript here:
http://yankee451.com/2014/01/07/cut-...e-episode-one/

What made the hole…..?

Mass of the aircraft ca, 127 tons
Velocity ca, 240 m/sec.
Therefore the kinetic energy available at the wall is ca, 3700 MJ.
Equal to ca, 870 Kg of TNT, more than enough to form the aircraft shaped hole!

Any questions?

It is most important to understand the nature of what we see, not what we want to see.

Robrob · 8th January 2014, 09:28 AM

Originally Posted by yankee451

Already have. You're really going to need to watch the video.

Why should we be bothered to spend our time watching your video to figure out your POV? If you can't be bothered to explain your claims in your own words, why is the burden on us to do your homework?

Dcdrac · 8th January 2014, 10:47 AM

one of these did
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...c/cc/Aa757.jpg

Loss Leader · 8th January 2014, 11:12 AM

Once again, I point out that you're examining twelve year-old video that was originally compressed into the format available at the time and has been run through heaven knows how many different video compression formats since. What happens to pixels when their color changes faster than the frame rate? What happens to details smaller than a pixel?

Add to that the fact that, since nobody with a camera was expecting the event, all of the video is from whatever angle the camera happened to catch. None of it was shot head on.

I don't know how anyone can examine any 9/11 video on the internet and come to any conclusion whatsoever other than, "Damn!"

fess · 8th January 2014, 11:30 AM

Originally Posted by yankee451

In this video I examine the North Tower impact damage on 9/11, allegedly caused by American Airlines Flight 11.

The damage evidence eliminates explosives alone as being the cause, and at the same time it eliminates a Boeing 767 or a reinforced jet of any kind. The video also dispenses with the hologram nonsense and pokes fun at the “mini-nuke” crowd as well as pokes a finger in the eye of the Judy Wood clique.

http://yankee451.com/2014/01/07/cut-...e-episode-one/

Transcript here:
http://yankee451.com/2014/01/07/cut-...e-episode-one/

I haven’t seen this much bunk since the missiles hit the ground at Shanksville.

And before you ask, although I am somewhat embarrassed to admit it, I did watch your very poor video.

ozeco41 · 8th January 2014, 12:05 PM

Originally Posted by Robrob

Why should we be bothered to spend our time watching your video to figure out your POV? If you can't be bothered to explain your claims in your own words, why is the burden on us to do your homework?

jaydeehess · 8th January 2014, 12:29 PM

Typical " I did all this work and made a video. Its stupendous, its genius, but don't expect me to try to summarize it, just watch and glory in my innovation and genius"

beachnut · 8th January 2014, 12:35 PM

Originally Posted by yankee451

In this video I examine the North Tower impact damage on 9/11, allegedly caused by American Airlines Flight 11.

The damage evidence eliminates explosives alone as being the cause, and at the same time it eliminates a Boeing 767 or a reinforced jet of any kind. The video also dispenses with the hologram nonsense and pokes fun at the “mini-nuke” crowd as well as pokes a finger in the eye of the Judy Wood clique.

http://yankee451.com/2014/01/07/cut-...e-episode-one/

Transcript here:
http://yankee451.com/2014/01/07/cut-...e-episode-one/

Flight 11 did it, and to say otherwise is a lie.

Spreading lies on the internet is the only thing you do? Why?

http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/foia/9_11...l_aircraft.pdf
Wow, the NTSB debunked your fantasy.

Radar data proves you wrong, called science, the claims you make are anti-science.

Not sure why you come here, you call us what? You call everyone this?

Quote:

I see another intellectually stunted JREF blowhard wandered away from the protection of the herd.
Careful, you are in danger of learning something. http://yankee451.com/2014/01/07/cut-...e-episode-one/

The silly video shows part of the facade, Aluminum facade held on with clips for your evidence. that is funny

Flight 11 hit with the energy of a bomb, 1300 pounds of TNT, almost equal to 3 500 pound bombs. In the shape of a jet, this energy easily entered the WTC which was designed to stop a 187 pound KE impact. Remember in High School and all the "smart" kids took physics, and you did not? BINGO

Please move all this junk to 451s old missiles stuff, when he finishes his next fantasy video of woo, it will be posted and it all goes back to the old silly supersonic missile crap.

Quote:

In my search for an honest engineer I came upon one who agreed to write-up a finite element analysis in support of my hypothesis that two JASSM cruise missiles (bunker-busters) striking at ten degree trajectories from opposite directions were responsible for the gash at Shanksville. Engineer Derek Ross took my down payment but never provided a finished product – so I guess I’m still looking for an honest engineer.

This is sad. Do you have anyone who can help you? Family? Do you know why the engineer stopped working for you? Ask your family.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L9UXKOIvuYE

You remind me of this guy in the video.

This refutes your video with real science. Go Yankee451; have you read Don Quixote?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kn3a--hf7_s
Your video about doing a wing test?
Where is the test? BTW, on 911 two jets hit the WTC, and I have proof, but you don't do science, you make up stuff.

Dumb All Over · 8th January 2014, 01:48 PM

What caused the plane-shaped hole?

....hmmm....

A duck?

yankee451 · 8th January 2014, 01:54 PM

Originally Posted by Peter May

Any questions?

Yes.

Can you demonstrate how the east-west damage to the steel is consistent with a mostly hollow aluminum jet striking in a north-south trajectory?

Polaris · 8th January 2014, 01:59 PM

Originally Posted by Dumb All Over

What caused the plane-shaped hole?

....hmmm....

A duck?

Animal · 8th January 2014, 01:59 PM

Originally Posted by yankee451

Yes.

Can you demonstrate how the east-west damage to the steel is consistent with a mostly hollow aluminum jet striking in a north-south trajectory?

Mostly hollow? BWAHAHHAHA

Polaris · 8th January 2014, 02:00 PM

Originally Posted by Animal

Mostly hollow? BWAHAHHAHA

That's why everybody always raves about the amount of leg room on those things.

yankee451 · 8th January 2014, 02:01 PM

Originally Posted by Craig4

What I don't understand is why you think, death rays, controlled demolition, missiles, holograms and what you believe aren't all the same thing.

I'm pretty sure that's not all you don't understand.

Originally Posted by Craig4

Your irrational belief is neither better nor worse than the other truthers.

Lemme guess, continuing the carnage without question is what you would consider "rational".

beachnut · 8th January 2014, 02:07 PM

Originally Posted by yankee451

I'm pretty sure that's not all you don't understand.

Lemme guess, continuing the carnage without question is what you would consider "rational".

Your claims are silly. It is sad to see you lie about murder. Keep up the great work. What does your family say? What does the fox say?

Craig4 · 8th January 2014, 02:09 PM

Originally Posted by yankee451

I'm pretty sure that's not all you don't understand.

Lemme guess, continuing the carnage without question is what you would consider "rational".

Yes, there is a lot about your irrationality I don't get. In reality, you, Wood, Gage are all just deck stewards on the Titanic arguing feverishly about the arrangement of the deck chairs after the ship hit the iceberg. Your ideas are a distinction without a difference.

Let's not pretend you're on some noble hunt for truth. Your work wouldn't be of such a poor quality if this were some kind of grand gesture. About 3000 died on 9/11. Your kind should stick to chemtrails and Bigfoot. This is a serious topic and deserves better than you.

8th January 2014, 12:48 AM	#1
yankee451 Master Poster Join Date: Jan 2013 Posts: 2,774	What Caused the Plane Shaped Hole In this video I examine the North Tower impact damage on 9/11, allegedly caused by American Airlines Flight 11. The damage evidence eliminates explosives alone as being the cause, and at the same time it eliminates a Boeing 767 or a reinforced jet of any kind. The video also dispenses with the hologram nonsense and pokes fun at the “mini-nuke” crowd as well as pokes a finger in the eye of the Judy Wood clique. http://yankee451.com/2014/01/07/cut-...e-episode-one/ Transcript here: http://yankee451.com/2014/01/07/cut-...e-episode-one/
yankee451 Master Poster Join Date: Jan 2013 Posts: 2,774	__________________ www.yankee451.com www.911crashtest.org

8th January 2014, 01:10 AM	#2
threadworm Graduate Poster Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 1,596	A plane.
	__________________ Facts are simple and facts are straight, facts are lazy and facts are late, facts don't come with points of view, facts don't do what I want them to. ************************** Apollo Hoax Debunked

8th January 2014, 01:30 AM	#3
alienentity Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 4,325	So how were they to be certain the jet would impact at precisely the points it did? That's some awesome precision flying....
alienentity Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 4,325	__________________ Heiwa - 'Anyone suggesting that part C structure can one-way crush down part A structure is complicit to mass murder!' 000063 - 'Problem with the Truthers' theories is that anyone with enough power to pull it off doesn't need to in the first place.' mrkinnies 'I'm not a no-planer' 'I don't believe Flight 77 hit the Pentagon'

8th January 2014, 01:44 AM	#4
Iamme Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 6,214	Originally Posted by threadworm A plane. Yeah. Makes one wonder why they didnt think of that. I got my chuckle reading your response. Lol
Iamme Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 6,214	__________________ I lost my mind many years ago and it hasn't affected me a bit...a bit..a bit..a bit.

8th January 2014, 01:49 AM	#6
Iamme Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 6,214	Originally Posted by yankee451 In this video I examine the North Tower impact damage on 9/11, allegedly caused by American Airlines Flight 11. The damage evidence eliminates explosives alone as being the cause, and at the same time it eliminates a Boeing 767 or a reinforced jet of any kind. The video also dispenses with the hologram nonsense and pokes fun at the “mini-nuke” crowd as well as pokes a finger in the eye of the Judy Wood clique. http://yankee451.com/2014/01/07/cut-...e-episode-one/ Transcript here: http://yankee451.com/2014/01/07/cut-...e-episode-one/ So the damage evidence eliminates a jet? or just the specific types of jets you list? Is this for real?
Iamme Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 6,214	__________________ I lost my mind many years ago and it hasn't affected me a bit...a bit..a bit..a bit.

8th January 2014, 01:45 AM	#5
ozeco41 Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Moss Vale, NSW, Australia Posts: 7,561	Whilst ever we see idiotic claims like Quote: ...we see a carefully prepared impact area with strategically removed bolts and floors. we can be assured that no one will take truthers seriously.

8th January 2014, 02:08 AM	#7
yankee451 Master Poster Join Date: Jan 2013 Posts: 2,774	Originally Posted by Iamme So the damage evidence eliminates a jet? or just the specific types of jets you list? Is this for real? Why, what kind of jet were you thinking of?
yankee451 Master Poster Join Date: Jan 2013 Posts: 2,774	__________________ www.yankee451.com www.911crashtest.org

8th January 2014, 02:17 AM	#8
Craig4 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: I live in a swamp Posts: 22,345	Originally Posted by yankee451 In this video I examine the North Tower impact damage on 9/11, allegedly caused by American Airlines Flight 11. The damage evidence eliminates explosives alone as being the cause, and at the same time it eliminates a Boeing 767 or a reinforced jet of any kind. The video also dispenses with the hologram nonsense and pokes fun at the “mini-nuke” crowd as well as pokes a finger in the eye of the Judy Wood clique. http://yankee451.com/2014/01/07/cut-...e-episode-one/ Transcript here: http://yankee451.com/2014/01/07/cut-...e-episode-one/ You're really going to need to show your work on this one.

8th January 2014, 02:18 AM	#9
yankee451 Master Poster Join Date: Jan 2013 Posts: 2,774	Originally Posted by Craig4 You're really going to need to show your work on this one. Already have. You're really going to need to watch the video.
yankee451 Master Poster Join Date: Jan 2013 Posts: 2,774	__________________ www.yankee451.com www.911crashtest.org

8th January 2014, 02:23 AM	#10
Craig4 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: I live in a swamp Posts: 22,345	Originally Posted by yankee451 Why, what kind of jet were you thinking of? What I don't understand is why you think, death rays, controlled demolition, missiles, holograms and what you believe aren't all the same thing. Your irrational belief is neither better nor worse than the other truthers.

8th January 2014, 02:29 AM	#11
Craig4 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: I live in a swamp Posts: 22,345	Originally Posted by yankee451 Already have. You're really going to need to watch the video. I started to but it became quickly apparent that your work isn't good enough to bother with.

8th January 2014, 02:34 AM	#12
Mudcat Man of a Thousand Memes Join Date: Apr 2011 Posts: 6,474	A Boeing 757. [/thread]
	__________________ "There is no special treatment for guns." ~WildCat, confirmed gun owner.

8th January 2014, 02:40 AM	#13
Craig4 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: I live in a swamp Posts: 22,345	Originally Posted by yankee451 Why, what kind of jet were you thinking of? The kind you showed in the video, you know, the one impacting the freaking building. What the hell other kind of jet could it be? Seriously, the fact that no other jet is in the damn video rules out every other kind of jet in existence. Why is this hard for you?

8th January 2014, 03:05 AM	#14
Kid Eager Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 6,819	Not this crap again. Start with a conclusion and come up with a convoluted scenario to explain the already arrived at conclusion. Ignore any evidence that disagrees with conclusion, don't care about absence of evidence to support own conclusion. Rinse, lather repeat. Create random video, as this is how one does good research and analysis, as every detective and scientist knows... Have piña colada. Mission accomplished.
Kid Eager Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 6,819	__________________ What do Narwhals, Magnets and Apollo 13 have in common? Think about it....

8th January 2014, 03:37 AM	#15
cjnewson88 Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2011 Posts: 1,725	Originally Posted by Mudcat A Boeing 757. [/thread] 767* Planes hit the towers. Get the **** over it yankee. /Thread
	__________________ Common sense has clearly been snuck up on from behind beaten several times on the head and left to bleed. Over 140 pieces of evidence showing American 77 hit the Pentagon http://therightbloggerbastard.blogspot.co.nz/ http://www.youtube.com/user/cjnewson88

8th January 2014, 05:13 AM	#16
LSSBB Devilish Dictionarian Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: An elusive house at Bachelors Grove Cemetery Posts: 20,058	Originally Posted by Kid Eager Not this crap again. Start with a conclusion and come up with a convoluted scenario to explain the already arrived at conclusion. Ignore any evidence that disagrees with conclusion, don't care about absence of evidence to support own conclusion. Rinse, lather repeat. Create random video, as this is how one does good research and analysis, as every detective and scientist knows... Have piña colada. Mission accomplished. +1.
	__________________ "You must not let your need to be right be more important than your need to find out what's true." - Ray Dalio, Principles

8th January 2014, 05:36 AM	#17
thedopefishlives Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 1,696	Originally Posted by cjnewson88 767* Planes hit the towers. Get the **** over it yankee. /Thread Quoted for truth.
	__________________ Truthers only insist that there must have been some sinister purpose behind [WTC7] because they already think there's a sinister purpose behind everything. -Horatius

8th January 2014, 06:29 AM	#18
Mark F Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2012 Posts: 1,740	Originally Posted by yankee451 In this video I examine the North Tower impact damage on 9/11, allegedly caused by American Airlines Flight 11. The damage evidence eliminates explosives alone as being the cause, and at the same time it eliminates a Boeing 767 or a reinforced jet of any kind. The video also dispenses with the hologram nonsense and pokes fun at the “mini-nuke” crowd as well as pokes a finger in the eye of the Judy Wood clique. http://yankee451.com/2014/01/07/cut-...e-episode-one/ Transcript here: http://yankee451.com/2014/01/07/cut-...e-episode-one/ Move along people, nothing to see here.
Mark F Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2012 Posts: 1,740	__________________ So I'm going to tell you what the facts are, and the facts are the facts, but then we know the truth. That always overcomes facts.

8th January 2014, 08:24 AM	#19
alfaniner Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 24,616	Quote: What Caused the Plane Shaped Hole The plane! The plane!
	__________________ Science is self-correcting. Woo is self-contradicting.

8th January 2014, 08:30 AM	#20
Spindrift Time Person of the Year, 2006 Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Right here! Posts: 19,246	How do you know that the video you're watching is running forwards? What if it's running backwards and the plane is actually being expelled from the building? They secretly built a 757 inside the tower and used super-thermite to blast it out the building. That would take care of the hologram nonsense as well. Bet you never thought of that.
	__________________ I've always believed that cluelessness evolved as an adaptation to allow the truly appalling to live with themselves. - G. B. Trudeau A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it. - Kay, Men in Black. Enjoy every sandwich. - Warren Zevon

8th January 2014, 08:45 AM	#21
Animal Master Poster Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: SE Michigan Posts: 2,094	Originally Posted by cjnewson88 767* Planes hit the towers. Get the **** over it yankee. /Thread Yep. It is also amazing that after 12+ years, troofers can;t tell the difference between steel columns and aluminum cladding

8th January 2014, 08:46 AM	#22
Jrrarglblarg Guest Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 12,673	Originally Posted by yankee451 I Transcript here: http://yankee451.com/2014/01/07/cut-...e-episode-one/ I refuse to watch youtub videos anymore, so thanks for providing the transcript. In it you assert: Quote: Now when we look at the gash we don’t see a plane-shaped gash and a random pile of twisted metal, we see a carefully prepared impact area with strategically removed bolts and floors. We noticed that almost all the “wing” damage was directional, but not in the direction the wings were traveling. 767 wings are swept-back about 30 degrees which would mean they would strike in a wedge motion, with the wings sawing from the inside out, from fuselage to wing-tips. The fuselage would strike first, and then would come the wings at the wing roots, followed by the engines and finally the wing tips. Had this happened the damage would reflect it – but it doesn’t. Your final statement, placed at the bottom of a paragraph where a conclusion would normally be found, does not appear to have any support in the paragraph. Would you please elaborate on this point for me and, with out insisting I watch your video, please present the facts you used to reach this (a priori) conclusion?
Jrrarglblarg Guest Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 12,673

8th January 2014, 09:04 AM	#23
NoahFence Banned Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Patriot Nation Posts: 22,131	Originally Posted by yankee451 In this video I examine the North Tower impact damage on 9/11, allegedly caused by American Airlines Flight 11. The damage evidence eliminates explosives alone as being the cause, and at the same time it eliminates a Boeing 767 or a reinforced jet of any kind. The video also dispenses with the hologram nonsense and pokes fun at the “mini-nuke” crowd as well as pokes a finger in the eye of the Judy Wood clique. http://yankee451.com/2014/01/07/cut-...e-episode-one/ Transcript here: http://yankee451.com/2014/01/07/cut-...e-episode-one/ Feel free to PM me so as not to out yourself, but what exactly do you people stand to gain by posting this easily debunked crap?

8th January 2014, 09:22 AM	#24
Mark F Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2012 Posts: 1,740	Originally Posted by yankee451 In this video I examine the North Tower impact damage on 9/11, allegedly caused by American Airlines Flight 11. The damage evidence eliminates explosives alone as being the cause, and at the same time it eliminates a Boeing 767 or a reinforced jet of any kind. The video also dispenses with the hologram nonsense and pokes fun at the “mini-nuke” crowd as well as pokes a finger in the eye of the Judy Wood clique. http://yankee451.com/2014/01/07/cut-...e-episode-one/ Transcript here: http://yankee451.com/2014/01/07/cut-...e-episode-one/ So it should look like this? Does that thinking sort of remind of you of this?
Mark F Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2012 Posts: 1,740	__________________ So I'm going to tell you what the facts are, and the facts are the facts, but then we know the truth. That always overcomes facts.

8th January 2014, 09:24 AM	#25
Peter May Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: Stockholm Posts: 1,212	Originally Posted by yankee451 In this video I examine the North Tower impact damage on 9/11, allegedly caused by American Airlines Flight 11. The damage evidence eliminates explosives alone as being the cause, and at the same time it eliminates a Boeing 767 or a reinforced jet of any kind. The video also dispenses with the hologram nonsense and pokes fun at the “mini-nuke” crowd as well as pokes a finger in the eye of the Judy Wood clique. http://yankee451.com/2014/01/07/cut-...e-episode-one/ Transcript here: http://yankee451.com/2014/01/07/cut-...e-episode-one/ What made the hole…..? Mass of the aircraft ca, 127 tons Velocity ca, 240 m/sec. Therefore the kinetic energy available at the wall is ca, 3700 MJ. Equal to ca, 870 Kg of TNT, more than enough to form the aircraft shaped hole! Any questions? It is most important to understand the nature of what we see, not what we want to see.
	Last edited by Peter May; 8th January 2014 at 09:47 AM.

8th January 2014, 09:28 AM	#26
Robrob Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2011 Posts: 5,497	Originally Posted by yankee451 Already have. You're really going to need to watch the video. Why should we be bothered to spend our time watching your video to figure out your POV? If you can't be bothered to explain your claims in your own words, why is the burden on us to do your homework?
Robrob Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2011 Posts: 5,497	__________________ Mister Earl: "The plural of bollocks is not evidence."

8th January 2014, 10:47 AM	#27
Dcdrac Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 5,141	one of these did http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...c/cc/Aa757.jpg
Dcdrac Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 5,141	Last edited by LashL; 13th January 2014 at 07:11 PM. Reason: To change oversized image to a link.

8th January 2014, 11:12 AM	#28
Loss Leader I would save the receptionist. Moderator Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Florida Posts: 27,719	Once again, I point out that you're examining twelve year-old video that was originally compressed into the format available at the time and has been run through heaven knows how many different video compression formats since. What happens to pixels when their color changes faster than the frame rate? What happens to details smaller than a pixel? Add to that the fact that, since nobody with a camera was expecting the event, all of the video is from whatever angle the camera happened to catch. None of it was shot head on. I don't know how anyone can examine any 9/11 video on the internet and come to any conclusion whatsoever other than, "Damn!"
	__________________ I have the honor to be Your Obdt. S^t L. Leader

8th January 2014, 11:30 AM	#29
fess Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 1,425	Originally Posted by yankee451 In this video I examine the North Tower impact damage on 9/11, allegedly caused by American Airlines Flight 11. The damage evidence eliminates explosives alone as being the cause, and at the same time it eliminates a Boeing 767 or a reinforced jet of any kind. The video also dispenses with the hologram nonsense and pokes fun at the “mini-nuke” crowd as well as pokes a finger in the eye of the Judy Wood clique. http://yankee451.com/2014/01/07/cut-...e-episode-one/ Transcript here: http://yankee451.com/2014/01/07/cut-...e-episode-one/ I haven’t seen this much bunk since the missiles hit the ground at Shanksville. And before you ask, although I am somewhat embarrassed to admit it, I did watch your very poor video.
fess Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 1,425	__________________ My boss told me to stop procrastinating. I think I will… tomorrow.

8th January 2014, 12:05 PM	#30
ozeco41 Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Moss Vale, NSW, Australia Posts: 7,561	Originally Posted by Robrob Why should we be bothered to spend our time watching your video to figure out your POV? If you can't be bothered to explain your claims in your own words, why is the burden on us to do your homework?

8th January 2014, 12:29 PM	#31
jaydeehess Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: 40 miles north of the border Posts: 20,843	Typical " I did all this work and made a video. Its stupendous, its genius, but don't expect me to try to summarize it, just watch and glory in my innovation and genius"

8th January 2014, 12:35 PM	#32
beachnut Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Dog House Posts: 25,807	Originally Posted by yankee451 In this video I examine the North Tower impact damage on 9/11, allegedly caused by American Airlines Flight 11. The damage evidence eliminates explosives alone as being the cause, and at the same time it eliminates a Boeing 767 or a reinforced jet of any kind. The video also dispenses with the hologram nonsense and pokes fun at the “mini-nuke” crowd as well as pokes a finger in the eye of the Judy Wood clique. http://yankee451.com/2014/01/07/cut-...e-episode-one/ Transcript here: http://yankee451.com/2014/01/07/cut-...e-episode-one/ Flight 11 did it, and to say otherwise is a lie. Spreading lies on the internet is the only thing you do? Why? http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/foia/9_11...l_aircraft.pdf Wow, the NTSB debunked your fantasy. Radar data proves you wrong, called science, the claims you make are anti-science. Not sure why you come here, you call us what? You call everyone this? Quote: I see another intellectually stunted JREF blowhard wandered away from the protection of the herd. Careful, you are in danger of learning something. http://yankee451.com/2014/01/07/cut-...e-episode-one/ The silly video shows part of the facade, Aluminum facade held on with clips for your evidence. that is funny Flight 11 hit with the energy of a bomb, 1300 pounds of TNT, almost equal to 3 500 pound bombs. In the shape of a jet, this energy easily entered the WTC which was designed to stop a 187 pound KE impact. Remember in High School and all the "smart" kids took physics, and you did not? BINGO Please move all this junk to 451s old missiles stuff, when he finishes his next fantasy video of woo, it will be posted and it all goes back to the old silly supersonic missile crap. Quote: In my search for an honest engineer I came upon one who agreed to write-up a finite element analysis in support of my hypothesis that two JASSM cruise missiles (bunker-busters) striking at ten degree trajectories from opposite directions were responsible for the gash at Shanksville. Engineer Derek Ross took my down payment but never provided a finished product – so I guess I’m still looking for an honest engineer. This is sad. Do you have anyone who can help you? Family? Do you know why the engineer stopped working for you? Ask your family. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L9UXKOIvuYE You remind me of this guy in the video. This refutes your video with real science. Go Yankee451; have you read Don Quixote? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kn3a--hf7_s Your video about doing a wing test? Where is the test? BTW, on 911 two jets hit the WTC, and I have proof, but you don't do science, you make up stuff.
	Last edited by beachnut; 8th January 2014 at 01:08 PM.

8th January 2014, 01:48 PM	#33
Dumb All Over A Little Ugly on the Side Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: They call it the Earth (which is a dumb kinda name) Posts: 6,154	What caused the plane-shaped hole? ....hmmm.... A duck?
	__________________ The Three Word Story Pledge of Allegiance- "I Hereby swear upon Engelbert's grave that I will gallop, not stride run, not walk posting three words on Shemp's honor, honoring: bananas, dwarfs, clarinets, [the 7th naughty forum word], haggis, Batman, nuns, wombats until such time as I'm sober. Or dead." "Some people have a way with words, other people...Um...Oh...Uh, not have way." -Steve Martin Last edited by Dumb All Over; 8th January 2014 at 01:50 PM.

8th January 2014, 01:54 PM	#34
yankee451 Master Poster Join Date: Jan 2013 Posts: 2,774	Originally Posted by Peter May Any questions? Yes. Can you demonstrate how the east-west damage to the steel is consistent with a mostly hollow aluminum jet striking in a north-south trajectory?
yankee451 Master Poster Join Date: Jan 2013 Posts: 2,774	__________________ www.yankee451.com www.911crashtest.org

8th January 2014, 01:59 PM	#35
Polaris Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 11,396	Originally Posted by Dumb All Over What caused the plane-shaped hole? ....hmmm.... A duck?
	__________________ "There's vastly more truth to be found in rocks than in holy books. Rocks are far superior, in fact, because you can DEMONSTRATE the truth found in rocks. Plus, they're pretty. Holy books are just heavy." - Dinwar "Let your ears hear this beautiful song that's hiding underneath the sound," Ed Kowalczyk.