Where does the "official story" state that the wing-tips penetrated the walls of the Twin Towers? The NIST report states that the wing-tips "marked the aluminum cladding on the columns". Their diagram of the damage on both towers shows that the columns where the wing-tips made contact were not severed: Their assessment looks consistent with close-up photographs of the impact holes, where you can clearly see that the wing tips sliced only through the outer aluminum cladding and in some cases bent, but did not sever, the steel columns:
Yes. I'm curious to know how, if no planes hit the buildings, the perps were able to create those impact holes where you have impressions in the aluminum cladding only at the ends where the wing-tips would have hit, and then you have steel beams and entire column panels bent and/or punched INWARD, perfectly matching the dimensions of a 767. Somehow they did this with explosives? Explosives that were invisible from the outside? AND they were able to sync the explosion exactly with a fake CGI plane simultaneously inserted into the live broadcasts of six different news stations? Impossible.
I've asked that question many times...according to Kokomojo, he claims explosives can be made to do anything. No evidence no proof needed, just the claim.
If you were shown a video over the evening "news" on TV, and said video was alleged to be of a bar fight, however it included a bit that the martial arts movies are famous for and that being the ninja punches somebody so hard as to propel them across the room. now upon seeing said video, you have a choice, because it was shown on the "news" you could simply accept it as what it was described to be, or you could by applying your own common sense, discredit the "news" and take on a whole new perspective of what comes to you over the TV ..... Likewise, its not simply an argument from "incredulity" that prompts me to write what I do, its the fact that applying commonsense, puts the whole hijacked airliners bit into deep do-do! we are expected to believe that airliners can fly at speeds in excess of 100 mph over VNE near sea-level and be controllable by novice pilots and hit their targets so hard as to cause the aircraft to disappear inside the building, leaving > 1% of itself outside the building. we are expected to believe that paper passports survived an event that destroyed the flight recorders of "FLT11" & "FLT175". REALLY PEOPLE, you are actually buying the crap that the media has been dishing out?
Funny, you say you are not arguing the logical fallacy, argument from incredulity, then continue with the bandwagon logical fallacy (Argument from Common Sense). You never cease to amuse though.
All the 'truthers' are 'no planers' to some extent. Whether it's no plane in Shanksville or NYC, they all seem to embrace this fantasy.
First, your analogy is a complete FAIL because it ignores the forensic evidence found at the scene...parts of planes, body parts, passengers luggage and belongings, eyewitnesses on the ground, RADAR tracking, ATC tracking and eyewitneses.... Second, the planes didn't fly at 100mph over VNE...they crashed. Not so difficult to do. Third, "the media has been dishing out..." is a false claim. Most of the videos and photos were not take by media outlets, they were taken by "regular joes", people on the street. NONE of your "no-planes" claims hold any water and can be debunked with common sense.
The above constitutes a non-reply do you .... or do you not see the analogy in the TV "news" bit? there are limits to what should be simply accepted from the "news". The fact is, the story as presented is: a hijacked airliner, flown by a novice pilot, allegedly flew >100mph over VNE and crashed into the WTC tower(s) and did not break off a wing or even a significant part of a wing, and the vertical stabilizer did break off, but it bits followed the rest of the aircraft into the tower. Just like as with the PENTAGON fiasco, where an airliner was alleged to hit the wall at such an angle as to have the starboard side wing tip contact the wall at aprox the same time as the nose of the alleged aircraft contacted the wall and with that, the aircraft made entry into the building such that > 1% of the aircraft remained outside on the PENTAGON lawn. If the TV "news" showed you a guy who bends spoons with his mental powers, would you buy it? I do not know about everybody else here, but I have my limits.
Lets just address this bit right here, where is the DOCUMENTATION of the alleged aircraft parts at the scene? + luggage & passenger remains, in the case of "FLT11" & "FLT175" I thought that the story was, everything was so busted up from having the whole skyscraper fall on it that it was next to impossible to isolate passenger remains for DNA ID of the passengers. also, funny thing this, the hijackers were allegedly ID'd from DNA, however, who went to the middle east and collected up samples from the families of the alleged hijackers to compare the bits found at ground zero? What do you call the claim that "FLT175" crashed into the south tower at 590 mph? may I again point out that air resistance increases by the cube ( that is X^3 ) of the velocity, therefore at double a given speed, the air resistance will be 8X what it was at the lower speed. The trouble with the 9/11 story is that there is a lot of "it could happen like that" when in fact a long string of low-probability events, adds up to something that is even less probable.
Please define "they" and note that complete destruction of anything is evidence of intent to cause total destruction.
The planes were completely destroyed. You evidently missed that part. That usually happens when they crash like that.
That is, so completely destroyed that the flight recorders of "FLT11" & "FLT175" have gone missing? There is also the timing of this complete destruction, the aircraft is seen keeping its shape, that is the part that is still outside the WTC tower, and it is only destroyed when it enters the building?
Flight recorders are just metal boxes, they are not some kind of super duper alien technology. Destroyed while entering the buildings while the rest of the remaining aircraft followed, just like the jet crashing into the solid cement wall.
in wreckage that was sorted for human remains ( even rather small bits ) and there were allegedly other things like wallets, ( etc .... ) recovered, so where is the at least recognizable bit of a flight recorder? the whole flight recorder was so completely pulverized that no recognizable bit remains? I say again, any case of complete destruction indicates an intent to destroy and the fact that there would have been 4 flight recorder boxes, a cockpit voice recorder and a flight parameters recorder in "FLT11" and "FLT175" this requires the complete and total destruction of boxes designed to survive crashes. totally improbable.
Still trying to teach bob the way things work,eh? Paper can survive because it isn't rigid,it can be crumpled,the 'black boxes' are rigid,they don't crumple sucessfully
The fact remains, Flight Recorders were designed to survive crashes, and even if there had been destruction of the flight recorders for both "FLT11" & "FLT175" that is a total of 4 boxes and wouldn't there be some recognizable remnant of a flight recorder to show that one had been present at the site? the only other possibility would be for the recorders ( all 4 of them ) to have been so completely destroyed that only pulverized bits remained and so were not identifiable. Really ... Damn good trick that, making 4 flight recorders disappear. P00F, I'm Merlin, I can make stuff disappear.
So was this tangent an admission that you're wing-tip theory was wrong? You didn't say anything more about it. Also--you keep going back to that bar fight video analogy. How is that at all similar? 9/11 was broadcast live by several news stations simultaneously. There' were thousands of people who witnessed the plane strike in person, with they're own eyes, and some who filmed it, and photographed it. Numerous firefighters and EMS personnel testified that they personally saw, heard, and even felt the planes hit the towers. They also testified to witnessing airplane debris on the streets and roof-tops below. Do you believe all of those men, men who were risking their lives, were lying and participating in a mass-murder plot? It makes no sense. Read excerpts from their testimonies here: First-Responder Eyewitnesses to the Planes that Hit the WTC on 9/11. How do you explain this?
