Please cite your best evidence of "no-planes"

Discussion in '9/11' started by LogicallyYours, Dec 11, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. RtWngaFraud

    RtWngaFraud Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2011
    Messages:
    20,420
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I just look for the USDA stamp on the side of the crap that is offered "officially", and realize it's all BS, and protected by specialists. I take in the WHOLE picture, not just the 'official' crap.
     
  2. holston

    holston Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2012
    Messages:
    1,591
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    38
    It's not me that's "missing", it's you that's dodging.

    The North Tower plane was headed in the wrong direction and the South tower plane was on the wrong trajectory. Those parts could only have come from the North tower blast or subsequent explosions as the buildings came down.

    That plane hit the South tower catacornered at an angle away from the Deutsche Bank and the North tower obstructed the path between them. The ejected parts which most likely consisted of heavy steel items like the engine which was capable of smashing through the building. Bones and flesh aren't capable of that anyway.

    Conclusion: Either the body parts were propelled backwards through the initial blast against air resistance and the forward momentum of the plane or they would had to have been blasted away from the collapse from explosions as the building collapsed.

    The presence of these body parts when they were discovered in that location was merely one more phenomenon which surprised and puzzled people after the disaster.


    The only explanation which debunkers can possibly present to explain the collapses of ALL THREE blgs, on the same day, in the same manner, depends upon the principle inherent in Verinage.

    Since Verinage denotes a CONTROLLED demolition, the occurrence of those principles only reenforces the notion that they were just what they appeared to be, CONTROLLED demolitions.

    Otherwise the chance of three such events within the given time and at the same location to have occurred would be extremely unlikely.


    To put it another way:

    Hypothetically, if one had several spare replicas of the WTC complex and an equivalent number of planes to perform multiple experiments with. One could fly them into the buildings time after time to see how many times the buildings would collapse in the manner of Verinage, ie under their own weight by the selected removal of crucial supports, then count the number of time in which those THREE separate buildings would all collapse in the same way.

    Out of ten such tries, how many times could we expect to see this happen again as it did on 9/11?

    Once? Twice? Ten times out of ten?

    A sample space of 100 such trials would produce results which would even be more reliable in predicting future such occurrences.

    Of those who like to gamble, how high of a wager would they be willing to place on a bet that they would fall again just like they fell on 9/11?

    Would they stake their lives on it?


    I think you see what I mean.
    No. I don't THINK you know what I mean; I KNOW you know what I mean.

    All disinformation agents and Sayinim working on behalf of greater Zion and the future Mashianic Age know exactly what I mean. They would have to be STUPID not to.
    And stupid, they are NOT!

    My prayer is that the Goy nation which they are leading down the path to destruction will wake up and realize it in time.
     
  3. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Like hell you do.....you make crap up regularly
     
  4. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Geeze,you're just chock full of supposition,aren't you?...the jets 'going the wrong way'....duh,they were going the wrong way the minute they stopped flying to their intended destination
     
  5. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,368
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Holston,

    Truther's claim that a smaller "upper section" cannot destroy a larger "lower section" of the same building via gravity and cite Newton's law as proof. Certain videos of the Verinage technique prove this claim wrong.

    Do you want to debate this claim?

    The Verinage technique PROVES that explosives are not needed and that if certain components of a structure fail, weakened by fire, destruction of components due to impacts, or manually failed, the building CAN be destroyed using the smaller upper section and gravity.
     
  6. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    14,784
    Likes Received:
    363
    Trophy Points:
    83

    what bull(*)(*)(*)(*).

    show one example of 25-30% of a steel structure can destroy the remaining 70-75%.

    Looks like debunkers are clueless to how verinage works too,

    One thing you got right right, you dont need explosives, you can use ropes and chains and bulldozers too.
     
  7. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,368
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FCjEi4z2KZA

    How did the upper three floors above the pulled section destroy the larger, lower section in the video above? According to you and all your cohorts, this is impossible due to Newton's laws.

    - - - Updated - - -

    So weakening a structure to a point it fails will work WITHOUT explosives? Thanks for admitting that.
     
  8. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    14,784
    Likes Received:
    363
    Trophy Points:
    83
    yeh seriously man it doesnt take a rocket scientist to figure out that if you torch all the columns with a cutting torch sooner or later the whole damn thing will come crashing down.

    that was not steel and the lower floors were appropriately pre-weakened.

    it is impossible except in dablunder land where they skip past all the little factoids to misrepresent the matter to push their political propaganda agenda.
     
  9. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,368
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    You mean Newton's laws know the difference between steel and non-steel structures? You truthers are arguing that an upper, smaller section of a building cannot destroy a larger, lower section of the same building. I can quote you guys if you want.



    You mean just like how the plane impacts severed/damaged/WEAKENED structural components and the resultant fires FURTHER weakened structural components?

    Glad your finally coming around.

    :clapping:
     
  10. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    14,784
    Likes Received:
    363
    Trophy Points:
    83
    engineers know the difference, dablunder site cut and pasters do not.

    big difference between the response of steel and other materials.

    so they were severed and damaged before the cgi plane impacted, yep I agree with that.
     
  11. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,368
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Correct. Obviously you don't.
     
  12. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    14,784
    Likes Received:
    363
    Trophy Points:
    83
    If you have not noticed I am not posting dablunder positions, they show up under your avatar.

    There is another poster that loses track of who he is, dont you think that is a bit out there?

    You expect everyone to accept the same grand ASSumptions you accept.

    Well it doesnt work that way.

    The only point you have made so far is that you have no point.
     
  13. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    88,474
    Likes Received:
    20,891
    Trophy Points:
    113
    A better quality than you poor resolution gif you mean. LOL
     
  14. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    88,474
    Likes Received:
    20,891
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yeah, yeah, yeah, again with no proof and against all of the eye witnesses.
     
  15. holston

    holston Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2012
    Messages:
    1,591
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    38
    The momentum of the plane which struck WTC 1 was in the "wrong" direction for any body parts from the crash to be carried towards the roof of the Deutsche bldg.
    In order for those parts to have came from the plane they would had to have traveled backwards against a 500 mph forward momentum plus over come any air or wind resistance over the distance which they would had to have traveled.

    Otherwise the body parts would had to have come from one of the occupants of the towers, in which case their presence on the roof of the Deutche bldg can only be explained by a force which was violent enough to not only tear those bodies into minute pieces, but also propel them horizontally away from the direction of the falling mass and through any intervening debris imposed by the collapsing building.

    There is no other way to explain their condition or presence since the buildings did not topple in that direction.

    The bodies of those who jumped from the windows were subjected to a much greater impact with a much greater velocity than that which would occur from a falling floor above their heads. Yet those bodies remained for the most part intact even though they were bursted. Any dismembered parts would not have landed a hundred yards away from the point of impact.

    Since the people who were killed during the collapse were INSIDE the structure, one would expect that their remains would have remained within it and be buried by it. A normal collapse would indeed result in much squashing, breaking, and tearing of members. But it would NOT leave them in hundreds of pieces or propel them through a wall of falling debris the distance to the roof of the Deutche building UNLESS they were exploded.

    It is certain that the pieces of bodies which were discovered on the roof of the Deutche bank building were the remains of people who were killed in an EXPLOSION. There is nothing else that can explain that condition.

    The only explosion observed which you can admit to and still maintain your story would had to been that that of the exploding plane which struck the North Tower. That is the only source of explosion from which they could have originated and still adhere to the speculation that there were no other explosions.

    As I said, those pieces would have to have acquired a force which was sufficient to overcome a forward momentum of 500 mph plus whatever wind resistance and through any other intervening exploded mass for the entire distance.

    The question is whether that is possible and if so if it is likely.

    The condition of those bodies as well as their location, like the conditions of those which were found in the wreckage, in similar condition, is highly suggestive of explosions which occurred before or during the collapse.

    This is corroborated by the hundreds of witnesses who attested to having heard multiple explosions.

    The FACT IS, that EXPLOSIONS DID OCCUR and the DeBunkers have not yet fabricated a yarn which is sufficient to explain them all.

    Be realistic. How many transformers could there possibly have been within the towers and exactly how much damage could they have possibly done, IF any, or even ALL of them exploded?


    Youskys continue to require painful stretches of the imagination to explain away all the anomalies of 9/11.

    There are WAY TOO MANY for comfort.
    I am as certain those were controlled demolitions as I need to be.

    The verdict is GUILTY AS CHARGED.
     
  16. holston

    holston Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2012
    Messages:
    1,591
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    38
    You need to re-read the post with your brain in gear.

    How many times have you heard the TV villains say "Prove it"?

    No dog could possibly eat that much homework without dying of indigestion. You get an F.
     
  17. AboveAlpha

    AboveAlpha Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2013
    Messages:
    30,296
    Likes Received:
    559
    Trophy Points:
    83
    I can't believe anyone actually believes it wasn't aircraft that impacted the Towers as never mind the MILLIONS of Eye witnesses in and around Manhattan never mind the close to 500 Million watching the 2nd aircraft CLEARLY impact the second tower.....as well as so much evidence it boggles the mind.

    Now there are times when questions of a conspiracy are warranted but there is NO QUESTION AND NO CONFLICTING EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER OF ANY KIND that aircraft did not impact the two WTC Towers.

    AboveAlpha
     
  18. holston

    holston Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2012
    Messages:
    1,591
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    38

    I believe that planes impacted the towers. MOST people for 9/11 Truth DO.

    If I didn't know better, I might think that you and your comrades are trying to convince the world that anyone who questions the Kosher authorities with regard to 9/11 are members of the Flat Earth Society.
    But that's OK because I have a similar opinion about anyone who can take an honest look at all the evidence indicating controlled demolitions in conjunction with a conspiracy to ensure the success of the 9/11 attacks and still not confess that it was set up. But that would apply to those who either have not learned to think for themselves critically and analytically or who are merely ignorant of those facts.

    The low estimation of those people is not nearly as low as the regard I have for those who already appreciate the evidence enough to know that a controlled demolition occurred, yet for one reason or another help to perpetuate the media lies about it and prevent others from learning the truth.

    For them I have nothing but contempt and at the highest, pity for the best among them, cowards that they be. I shudder to think what it would be like to be chained to a social, political, or religious system that would compel me to embrace lies and encourage others to do the same.

    The whole world wouldn't be worth the price.
     
  19. AboveAlpha

    AboveAlpha Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2013
    Messages:
    30,296
    Likes Received:
    559
    Trophy Points:
    83
    COMPLETE FANTASY.

    AboveAlpha
     
  20. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    14,784
    Likes Received:
    363
    Trophy Points:
    83
    where did you get the strange idea that eye witnesses trump forensic evidence? Not in this legal system.

    oh btw you still have not posted any eye witnesses that could be entered into evidence when do you plan to do that?

    You probably shouldnt include the guy who found the nose cone.
     
  21. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    14,784
    Likes Received:
    363
    Trophy Points:
    83
    because when a plane hits it looks like this

    [​IMG]

    not this

    [​IMG]

    or this

    [​IMG]

    or this

    [​IMG]

    or this

    [​IMG]


    yep the world vacuum cleaner buildings.
     
  22. AboveAlpha

    AboveAlpha Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2013
    Messages:
    30,296
    Likes Received:
    559
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Oh...I forgot you were an expert in aircraft impact! LOL!!!

    Actually more like an expert in stupid assertions.

    AboveAlpha
     
  23. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    14,784
    Likes Received:
    363
    Trophy Points:
    83
    nope I leave stoopid assertions to the dablunder sites and those who quote them.
     
  24. AboveAlpha

    AboveAlpha Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2013
    Messages:
    30,296
    Likes Received:
    559
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Look...if you had posted ANYTHING that could be considered evidence in even the slightest way I would be THE FIRST ONE doing something about it as I lost people I knew that day....and because of it I have had to do all sorts of...JOBS specific to it's result.

    But you have not.

    Unlike some people I am more than happy to look at all possibilities as I am only interested in the facts and realities but you have not presented one possible viable example of any kind that would show me or anyone else that the WTC Towers were hit by something other than what I KNOW to have been aircraft.

    AboveAlpha
     
  25. 7forever

    7forever Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    1,726
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    That's exactly why I used two ON THE GROUND eyewitnesses who confirmed that no plane was near the south tower when it exploded. Cloud was a mile away, and the emt was very close to the towers. Those accounts are corroborated by the media filming a small circular object. That's how those other witnesses are refuted, by matching up films to eyewitnesses who were not watching tv.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page