This is something straight out of YOUR playbook in that you go along and assert something and then when I prove you wrong, you just sweep it under...
and for ALL of the people who supported the "mostly windows" statement about the WTC tower wall, where is my apology for that fiasco? Cuts both...
I proved with the actual figures about how the wall of the WTC towers was less than 1/3 window and nobody so much as gave me an acknowledgement of...
and you picture there is intended to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that "FLT11" & "FLT175" were indeed hijacked and flown into the twin towers?...
in the case of an airliner striking a wall, the airliner would undergo HUGE stress and because of this huge stress, have damage to the aircraft...
So the truther community is expected to come up with an explanation as to why fire could not possibly have removed ALL of the structure, and ALL...
Note that in other airline disasters ( or for that matter 2 space shuttle disasters ) the bits of the aircraft are collected up and spread out on...
and it doesn't strike you as crazy the idea that the aircraft should retain its shape as it crashes into a wall so as to make a plane shaped hole...
The fact of the free fall acceleration and the condition of the building while it fell, is all the evidence needed to conclude that the structure...
NO, you are missing the point, the fact of 2.25 sec of free fall acceleration + the fact that the north west corner can be seen to remain vertical...
argument from incredulity...... also the fact that the North & West walls are seen descending at Free-Fall acceleration, proves beyond any doubt...
http://www.ae911truth.org/en/news-section/41-articles/905-911-debate-challenge-credentialed-professionals-need-only-apply.html Do you know any...
Can you be specific, that is at what point did I fail? I have quoted a WIKI article that specifies the Power increase by the CUBE of the velocity,...
So people can "eyeball" a scene and get better accuracy than with real measurements & calculations....(?) The statement that "FLT175" would be...
I'm calling foul here, I have proved that the facade of the WTC tower was less than 1/3 open space for windows and you refused to even acknowledge...
I have read the Popular Mechanics fiasco and its not compelling evidence at all! Note that in the case of the Empire State Building crash, the...
Boils down to a contest of "my experts are better than your experts" and I have to ask, do individuals exercise common sense these days?
Do YOU really & truly consider the video of "FLT175" disappearing into the WTC wall like a B movie ghost, to be evidence of an airliner having...
Science in and of itself, is fine, the Scientific method is alive & well, HOWEVER, the current crop of "peer reviewed" papers leaves a LOT to be...
For anyone who is curious, look up the B-25 crash into the Empire State Building and compare it to the WTC crash events and then THINK. Have a...
The proving that airliners were NOT used, is a non-starter because you do not prove a negative. therefore the damning evidence is in the fact...
Evidence...... where is the evidence of any of the 4 airliners? Snap-shots of piles of wreckage, but NO documentation..... And that video of the...
So rather than actually supply evidence of the aircraft, its back to "truthers are crazy" or?
So you believe that two masses connected by a piece of flexible wire or cable will act as one solid mass when striking a stationary object? what?
Quoted from WIKI ..... The fact is that YES it does take 8 times the power to double the speed of an aircraft or a VW Bus whatever its a fact of...
Separate names with a comma.
