yes we fully understand your point, when a 757 or 767 crashes they dont leave a debris pile. I'm not convinced.
Pan Am 103 broke apart in mid air after a bomb in the hold caused the nose to fall off the aircraft...equating the crashes to one another is more dishonesty by koko
Ah so it was completely broken up in the pieces we see on the scrap heap and floated gently down to the ground and did not crash. It landed on pillows. So nothing got bent or broken. yeh got it! LOL
not a strawman at all, its called pointing out the over the top ridiculous positions of posers and other official story spinners now in the corner and backs against the wall with no defense.
Yes I know that is why I called you on it. What was your point if not to spin that there was in fact enough mass to equal a real plane. That is mysteriously vaporized? Dr physics wants to know.
You cannot call someone on point that was never made. The mass of debris found was consistent with what would be expected. Your comparison to other crash sites is ignorant. It is you lacking any grasp of physics
Also the pieces of 103 came down in larger chunks,Who can forget the picture of the right side of the nose,with the slogan 'maid of the seas' painted on the side,lying in the field? Who can forget the stories of Lockerbie residents of bodies falling from the skies with the wreckage? KOKO comparing 103 to ANY of the 4 jets that crashed on 9/11 is blatant dishonesty,and one more reason I don't even respond OR read his posts,save for second hand in others replies.
Oh wow, good point! Flight 77 would have come down in one BIG really large chunk, a whole plane all at once! Um so what? Do they like vaporize if they come down in one chunk and dont vaporize if they come down in several chunks is that your theory now? - - - Updated - - - Yes I imagined that you would have an answer, but is seems you were just bluffing again.
anyone who reads the posts you all are putting up here has proof sense is not common at all in official story supporters!
Is that all you people can post is the usual unreason and illogic then? last thing you want to do is listen to the HONEST people that were actually on the sites.
You post a debris pile that came from an aircraft crash. What did this aircraft crash into? I don't see a hardened building there that it crashed into. Yet that crash is supposed to be the same as the Pantagon? Those buildings that aircraft supposedly crashed into that isn't in the photo is the same sort of building? Got photos of this building to show as well?
Bump for Bob. Including a link to my video summarising it all, as well as the White House photo's which show Cheney still in his office at 9:36am (when Mineta said he was in the bunker getting read outs from a military aide). [video=youtube;00N9zikO5Ds]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00N9zikO5Ds[/video] https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jul/25/9-11-white-house-photos-george-bush-dick-cheney
Unfortunately 9/11 Truth loves chasing red herrings instead of bringing to light real evidence. It's what tends to happen when you have a movement that clutches at straws.
