"every kid with a theory" .... right, however you refuse to address the fact that the airliners have never been proven. The procedure for any airliner crash is to examine the aircraft parts for serial numbers, and confirm the identity of the aircraft. ( and people are going to complain that we know what happened, but really do we? ) When there is NO documentation of the airliners why should people simply believe that there was even a FLT11, FLT175, FLT77, FLT93? Any other crime would have been investigated complete with demands to document the aircraft. as for the alleged eye witnesses, exactly how many people actually went on record as having seen the airliners and could reliably identify an airliner as apposed to a military aircraft or missile? The world saw it on TV, and as we all know TV = propaganda machine.
The airliners have been proven the documentation provided the proof overwhepming and you simly lied through your fingers typing that post. The answer to your second part is the general population of New York City.
You are saying that every citizen of NYC documented having laid eyes on "FLT175" and positively identified it as a commercial airliner? You allege "overwhelming" documentation of all the aircraft as to the identity of said flights and the airliners that crashed at the twin towers ( etc.... ) however, where is this documentation? in the Kean Report? really? Can you personally point out where this documentation can be found?
enough of them did and it's the 9/11 report,NOT the 'kean report' https://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/whattheysaw:eyewitnessaccountsofthenycai And once again,you ignore the fact that people on the planes were talking to family and the airlines headquarters right up to the time of the planes crashing......look for it.
Given a conflict between the physical evidence and eyewitness reports I will take physical evidence every time. People complain that it would be too complex, too many people involved ( etc... ) however when faced with actual physical evidence that conflicts with the eyewitness accounts, what do YOU do ?
But when it suites you - Eye witness accounts are 100% reliable. You can not have your cake and eat it
when have I quoted eyewitness accounts over physical evidence? and even wiping the slate clean of any eyewitness accounts, the preponderance of evidence points to CD of the towers & 7 and no airliners having been hijacked that day.
Yet you blithely ignore physical evidence.....plane parts found on the roof of surrounding buildings,and on the streets mean nothing.
Where was BOEING at this time? Typically in the case of an airliner disaster, the OEM gets involved because their people are very knowledgeable in the matter of their aircraft and can be of valuable assistance in sorting out the bits and also getting to the WHY it happened and how the aircraft reacted to the stress. In the case of the alleged aircraft parts found in Manhattan that day, were any of them positively identified as belonging to either "FLT11" or "FLT175"? We have a lot of stuff that looks a bit like aircraft parts, however are we absolutely certain that these bits came from either "FLT11" or "FLT175" ?
You see, there is this SCIENCE of statistics & probability and by what is known about buildings and fires and the sorts of things that happen. It is obvious that the total destruction of three buildings on the same day & alleged to be NOT controlled demolition is way outside of the parameters that one could consider likely, more highly unlikely than anything. The manner in witch each building "collapsed", WTC1,2 "collapsed" into total destruction in what was a rather short time, I believe everyone can agree on a time of <17 sec for each, and that is rather fast for a "natural" collapse given that the lower section of each tower, that is below the alleged crash site, had no fires and took no damage at all, therefore stood as sturdy as always. The official explanation states that the collapse of the upper part kicked off a cascade effect that resulted in the total destruction of the building but in a probabilities perspective, this is VERY unlikely. There are many more potential out-comes of the "collapse" initiation than just complete destruction, there are possible scenarios that would have resulted in the incomplete destruction of said tower. and on to WTC7, it is a fact that the building or at least a significant part of the building fell at free fall acceleration for 2.25 sec, this clearly indicates that ALL of the resistance had to have been removed out from under it and all at the same time. Nobody can justify that except for in the case of controlled demolition.
And the NTSB has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that ALL of the aircraft bits recovered on 9/11 were indeed parts of either "FLT175" or "FLT11" ?
So you believe that there is no such thing as the SCIENCE of Statistics & Probability ? is that what you think? The grand edifice that is Las Vegas is a testament to the fact that applied statistics & probability works.
How about fake aircraft bits that were dumped in place to give the impression that there was a crashed commercial airliner there. There are people with the motive, means & opportunity to create a fake attack.
The proof is in the fact that the alleged hit by "FLT175" as shown in the video record of it, is truly a farce, there is no way an airliner even if the hijackers could have power-dived the aircraft into the wall at >500 mph would look like what was shown. Please examine carefully the argument "oh but the plane was going so fast... " as an excuse for the aircraft showing no deceleration at all upon striking the WTC wall.
They didn't 'power dive ' into anything,and calling it a farce is your OPINION,not backed by any facts didn't have to show any decelaration.....remember the F-4 phantom video hitting the cement wall? It didn't slow down Time to quit using that dodge
The F4 video & the alleged crash of "FLT175" is an apples/oranges comparison. at this point, I really don't care what YOU think, I'm attempting to raise awareness of the issues so that maybe some people will actually look at what happened rather than just take the TV's word for it. and yes there is such a thing as the SCIENCE of Statistics & Probability.
It did not power dive and there is nothing at all impossible for an airliner to have done what this one did. It did decelerate upon striking the WTC outer wall. Obviously such deceleration would not have been visible to the naked eye on film but it did happen. Just as a bullet decelerates upon striking the outer layer of clothing on a persons body when they are shot but it would not be visible.
Yes you do. If you didn't care, you wouldn't be debating anyone here. The "issues" are easily explainable WITHOUT conspiracy theories. You have been provided explanations and just continue to ignore them. You are correct, except you are missing the science part in your evidence and explanations.
