Missile?? - Page 21

Grizzly Bear · 3rd September 2011, 08:20 PM

Originally Posted by tmd2_1

Explain any of these to me? It hasn't been done yet.

Oh? Then why is it is every physics book that this phenomenon called "friction" is discussed? Things like energy created in the form of heat because of the friction occuring between two different materials... Is there any compelling reason why this should be ignored?

Quote:

Energy from friction creates heat. For example when you rub your hands, sharpen a pencil, make a skid mark with your bike, or use the brakes on your car, friction generates heat.

Source

Example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3tiGbrVlptQ

Maybe if you're looking for an elementary school explanation, you could try this:

Quote:

Making Heat
How do you make heat? You could burn things (chemical reactions), or you could rub things together (friction).

source

tmd2_1 · 3rd September 2011, 08:33 PM

Originally Posted by Grizzly Bear

Oh? Then why is it is every physics book that this phenomenon called "friction" is discussed? Things like energy created in the form of heat because of the friction occuring between two different materials... Is there any compelling reason why this should be ignored?

Source

Example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3tiGbrVlptQ

Maybe if you're looking for an elementary school explanation, you could try this:

source

Yeah because the flash happens before impact, and it wouldn't even begin to explain the flash/flame coming out of the A/C.

dafydd · 3rd September 2011, 10:11 PM

Originally Posted by tmd2_1

Yeah because the flash happens before impact, and it wouldn't even begin to explain the flash/flame coming out of the A/C.

It has been explained to you,but you appear to be too obtuse to understand. How far have you got with physics at your school?

bill smith · 4th September 2011, 02:10 AM

Originally Posted by atavisms

Maybe that stuff is true but I think it hurts 9-11 truth to use it.
I dont think there would be a need (or surreptitious manner) in which to replace the perimeter columns! The fuel in the wings and the engines were the most substantial parts of the planes and at that speed tore right through those hollow perimeter columns/wall assemblies, leaving their rough outline on the buildings facade.

If I were you I would just stick to the facts that prove the use of explosives:
There is NOTHING theoretical about these facts:

-The speed and symmetry in the destruction of wtc 1,2&7
-WTC7's implosion
-The Squibs and the Explosiveness of wtc 1&2 which literally erupted creating massive debris fields, pulverizing most of the 160 tons of concrete and blasting it, the superstructures and perimeter wall assemblies and building contents all over the surrounding streets! The streets were strewn with thousands of body parts. And despite a two years search for human remains (at Freshkills Landfill, SI) there remained no discernible genetic trace of 1100 human beings. They remain: 'unaccounted for.'
-The witness and first responder testimony.
-The 99 day fires. With excessive heat *up to 2800f days after 9/11 (see Bechtel and NASA readings even weeks late).
-The elemental iron microspheres
-the Molten metal: See: fema bpat http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evid...WTC_apndxC.htm
-NIST's refusal to even test for explosives despite the procedural mandate to do so. And what their spokesperson said when asked. 'why not?' 'Its a waste of time to look for something that isn't present" they replied.
-Danish hero Dr Niels Harrit et al's study is undeniable proof of the presence of advance-engineered thermitic explosives in the WTC dust. Like the Anthrax attacks of the same time period, it leads right back to US military labs and contractors.
And the highly revealing clip used in The NORTH TOWER EXPLODING VIDEO http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSApOavkHg8

There's more.. but this should be enough for most reasonable people to realize that, at the very least, a proper investigation (you know, one that actually considers the evidence and does not begin with it's conclusions) is needed.

I agree with most of what you say but I do not believe, and am not willing to assume that the delicate aircraft slid through the steel wall of the WTC as if you could slip your hand into a mirror. That is impossible.

So that leaves me with the choice of believing in no-planes (for which there is ample evidence it must be said) and looking at the possibility that the columns in the impact area were replaced with something much weaker than steel to facilitate the entrance of the aircraft into the building in the manner we saw.

I know which of these two choices would be easist for the perps to implement. Do you agree ?

The Platypus · 4th September 2011, 02:55 AM

Originally Posted by bill smith

I agree with most of what you say but I do not believe, and am not willing to assume that the delicate aircraft slid through the steel wall of the WTC as if you could slip your hand into a mirror. That is impossible.

So that leaves me with the choice of believing in no-planes (for which there is ample evidence it must be said) and looking at the possibility that the columns in the impact area were replaced with something much weaker than steel to facilitate the entrance of the aircraft into the building in the manner we saw.

I know which of these two choices would be easist for the perps to implement. Do you agree ?

I know an easier choice that makes even more sense... You are wrong.

What is it with 911 kooks that they can't ever be mature enough to admit that they could be wrong about anything. Why is it so much easier to believe in lies, even as ridiculous as "no planes", than it is to admit to yourself that you don't understand some things and that you don't know everything. Weird...

bill smith · 4th September 2011, 03:02 AM

Originally Posted by The Platypus

I know an easier choice... You are wrong.

What is it with 911 kooks that they can't ever be mature enough to admit that they could be wrong about anything. Is it so much easier for you to believe in lies, even as ridiculous as "no planes", than it is for you to admit to yourself that you don't understand physics. Weird...

That's the very point. Replacing sections of the perimeter columns in the impact areas with fake columns of a weaker material than the original steel is much LESS exotic than the no-planes theory.

The Platypus · 4th September 2011, 03:17 AM

Originally Posted by bill smith

That's the very point. Replacing sections of the perimeter columns in the impact areas with fake columns of a weaker material than the original steel is much LESS exotic than the no-planes theory.

That you are wrong about the entire scenario to begin with and that you just don't understand physics enough, is the most plausible and the least exotic theory.

Blaupunkt69 · 4th September 2011, 03:54 AM

Originally Posted by tmd2_1

Well there's several scenarios I can think of, but Airport security at the highest levels would have had to have been involved. Security at all 3 airports just happened to be run by the same company at the time. Coincidence I'm sure. If airport security was involved it is possible. For me to give scenario's would only be speculation on my part. This thread was started as a question, I was looking for an explanation for the flash(es) so far I have only seen one that seems to be possible at all. But seems extremely unlikely, and that's static discharge.

Airport security was involved in this conspiracy too? How many people would that be roughly? What is the total number of people needed to pull off your conspiracy fantasy? Is it the more the merrier or do conspiracies work better when you have fewer people in on it?

leftysergeant · 4th September 2011, 04:10 AM

Originally Posted by bill smith

So that leaves me with the choice of believing in no-planes (for which there is ample evidence it must be said) and looking at the possibility that the columns in the impact area were replaced with something much weaker than steel to facilitate the entrance of the aircraft into the building in the manner we saw.

This is more plausible than THIS.

It is also equally probably that Elvis has been hiding out in the Hindu Kush for thirty years waiting for a chance to live in an actual Christian nation some day.

There is no way to replace the steel columns with another material unobserved. It is also impossible to break them in the manner observed other than to hit them with a solid object shaped like the hole seen in the side of the buildings.

The only thing in the world shaped like that, and of the appropriate size, is an passenger aircraft about the size of a 757.

Sorry, no cigar.

leftysergeant · 4th September 2011, 04:14 AM

Originally Posted by bill smith

I agree with most of what you say but I do not believe, and am not willing to assume that the delicate aircraft slid through the steel wall of the WTC as if you could slip your hand into a mirror. That is impossible.

Did you know that it is possible to blow your brains out with a paper bullet?

ETA: I am NOT suggesting that any bleedin drongo try this, because I know that they will succede, and I will get blamed for it.

WildCat · 4th September 2011, 05:48 AM

Originally Posted by tmd2_1

Well there's several scenarios I can think of, but Airport security at the highest levels would have had to have been involved. Security at all 3 airports just happened to be run by the same company at the time. Coincidence I'm sure. If airport security was involved it is possible. For me to give scenario's would only be speculation on my part. This thread was started as a question, I was looking for an explanation for the flash(es) so far I have only seen one that seems to be possible at all. But seems extremely unlikely, and that's static discharge.

Your incredibly huge list of co-conspirators gets even larger...

tjlance1 · 4th September 2011, 05:56 AM

It's truly a waste of time trying to rationally speak to truthers..as ten years have gone by, the more their claims are proven wrong, the wilder the claims become. It's a snowball effect. Unconsciously, they realize that what they believed isn't true, so in order to perpetuate their belief, a new theory is developed. Unfortunately for truthers, there is NOTHING that supports their belief...

Dash80 · 4th September 2011, 06:06 AM

Originally Posted by tmd2_1

Yeah because the flash happens before impact, and it wouldn't even begin to explain the flash/flame coming out of the A/C.

*points and laughs*

Oh tmd you do make me chuckle. Physics wasn't my best subject but even I understand friction!

dafydd · 4th September 2011, 06:54 AM

Tmd is confusing friction and fiction.

Grizzly Bear · 4th September 2011, 07:07 AM

Originally Posted by tmd2_1

Yeah because the flash happens before impact, and it wouldn't even begin to explain the flash/flame coming out of the A/C.

The flash happens upon first contact with the wall, and it creates enough friction to generate sparks as it does so. Friction between two objects releases heat energy, as you know full well. The "other flash" you refer to is not apparent in any other video shot of the aircraft and frankly you've done nothing but speculate when the answer to your question was a simple look into a physics book.

Bill Smith I see from the quotes is being his usual self; suggesting the columns themselves must have been replaced to make them weaker. The sheer stupidity of that idea is only matched by the thinking that a passenger airliner was firing a missile into the building with nothing to show for evidence except for a frame artifact in a single video out of hundreds

Dash80 · 4th September 2011, 07:24 AM

Originally Posted by bill smith

That's the very point. Replacing sections of the perimeter columns in the impact areas with fake columns of a weaker material than the original steel is much LESS exotic than the no-planes theory.

Ok bill whatever you say. Replacing a large number of exterior column assemblies on New York's two tallest buildings... without anyone noticing. Sure, very plausible!

Even killer cream pies sounds more sane than that.

Animal · 4th September 2011, 07:48 AM

Originally Posted by The Platypus

That you are wrong about the entire scenario to begin with and that you just don't understand physics enough, is the most plausible and the least exotic theory.

Why is it such a hard concept to accept for troofers, that the horizontal loading caused by the impact of the aircraft far exceeded the failure points of the steel columns that were never design for such loads?

Dash80 · 4th September 2011, 08:47 AM

Originally Posted by Animal

Why is it such a hard concept to accept for troofers, that the horizontal loading caused by the impact of the aircraft far exceeded the failure points of the steel columns that were never design for such loads?

Because they prefer ignorance?

It's funny, the famous Frank De Martini quote concerning the ability of the towers to survive "multiple jet impacts" also contains the information that they would still penetrate the structure. Truthers (mostly no planers/missile loons) trot out the survival quote and ignore the rest.

djlunacee · 4th September 2011, 08:55 AM

Originally Posted by tmd2_1

First of all this is not a "theory" it is a question. I certainly don't base the whole collapse of the towers on whether or not that was missile. Far from it. A question that no one has really given much of a plausible answer to. In fact only one is at all possible. Although I have found no evidence of any discharge looking anything like what we see.

So your JAQqing off? Then why refuse to listen to the answers given by those who are professionals in the relevant fields?

Originally Posted by tmd2_1

No I don't mean the U.S government. I mean a relatively small criminal cabal inside of it, a cabal that also includes people from other countries, as well as some other "elite".

Really? Who?

Originally Posted by tmd2_1

I've never once claimed hushaboom bombs or anything like that. First of all there are numerous eye witnesses that say they heard explosions. So I do not know what may have or may not have been used.

Progress! Admitting you don't know something! Maybe you might try to listen to those here who do.

Originally Posted by tmd2_1

Why would they want to eliminate fall back? Simple they would want as little of the plane to be found as possible. Because the parts may not match what they should have been.

This may be one of the silliest things I have ever heard. Please reread and think about what you are saying here.

Originally Posted by tmd2_1

Now I know you will say, parts were found, this is true. But it may surprise you to know (and this has all been covered in this thread previously) that no parts serial numbers have been publicly declared to match what they should have been. It doesn't even look like it was done at all. See here
http://911blogger.com/node/14406

You have contacted the insurance companies who paid out millions in insurance claims to American and United Airlines? I am sure they would be interested to know there is a possibility they paid out when they didn't need to, right? Or could it be they had no doubt, that the planes identified as flights 11,175,77,93 were paid out on the proper insurance claims?

Originally Posted by tmd2_1

Now you can say there is no doubt as to what the planes were, so there is no need to look into it. Well I can give several answers. First this is not a very difficult thing to do. You get the serial, and enter into a database to see which plane it belongs. Or you can look at the serial numbers it should have been through that database, and see if they match the numbers found. It's not like DNA testing which is expensive and timely. Also there's recorded evidence that the flight was still in the air according to flight explorer.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdXGSefI6pM

Do you understand what happens when a planes transponder is turned off?

fess · 4th September 2011, 09:06 AM

Originally Posted by tmd2_1

Well there's several scenarios I can think of, but Airport security at the highest levels would have had to have been involved. Security at all 3 airports just happened to be run by the same company at the time. Coincidence I'm sure. If airport security was involved it is possible. For me to give scenario's would only be speculation on my part. This thread was started as a question, I was looking for an explanation for the flash(es) so far I have only seen one that seems to be possible at all. But seems extremely unlikely, and that's static discharge.

Nice dodge.

Since when did airport security have anything to do with servicing the aircraft? So far, the only ones that “Trutherville” hasn’t implicated in this conspiracy are the parking lot attendants.

You cannot continue to speculate about this missile being used if you can’t show how this missile was attached to the aircraft to begin with.

Like I said, it’s very simple. Just show who, what, where, how, and when.

I Ratant · 4th September 2011, 09:40 AM

.
After watching some of the Nat Geo coverage, pissing on the graves of everyone who died that day is all these seriously deranged disturbed sick examples of the lowest form of human can accomplish.

The Platypus · 4th September 2011, 10:28 AM

Originally Posted by I Ratant

.
After watching some of the Nat Geo coverage, pissing on the graves of everyone who died that day is all these seriously deranged disturbed sick examples of the lowest form of human can accomplish.

I'd even go as far as to consider them traitors.

bill smith · 4th September 2011, 10:55 AM

Originally Posted by Dash80

Ok bill whatever you say. Replacing a large number of exterior column assemblies on New York's two tallest buildings... without anyone noticing. Sure, very plausible!

Even killer cream pies sounds more sane than that.

If they hung that netting they use over the areas they worked on nobody would notice a thing Dash. You know it.

cyclonic · 4th September 2011, 11:00 AM

Originally Posted by bill smith

If they hung that netting they use over the areas they worked on nobody would notice a thing Dash. You know it.

Bill have you being eating those mushrooms again? You know it.

Animal · 4th September 2011, 11:06 AM

Originally Posted by cyclonic

Bill have you being eating those mushrooms again? You know it.

He has to be.....considering this.....

WildCat · 4th September 2011, 11:15 AM

Originally Posted by fess

Nice dodge.

I saw an awesome '69 Charger being towed down the highway the other day (presumably to an auto show/auction), it was immaculate!

eta: no, it was not painted like the General Lee.

I Ratant · 4th September 2011, 11:42 AM

Originally Posted by WildCat

I saw an awesome '69 Charger being towed down the highway the other day (presumably to an auto show/auction), it was immaculate!

eta: no, it was not painted like the General Lee.

.
There was a car lot off to the south of the Burbank airport where the General Lees rested between takes.
Bunch of them there.

Dash80 · 4th September 2011, 12:07 PM

Originally Posted by bill smith

If they hung that netting they use over the areas they worked on nobody would notice a thing Dash. You know it.

Oooh netting that makes everything invisible! I gotta get me some of that, imagine the places I could sneak into! Oooh invisible construction workers too, not sure about that one though. Wolf whistles are annoying enough for us girls without not knowing where they're coming from.

Blaupunkt69 · 4th September 2011, 12:46 PM

Originally Posted by Dash80

Oooh netting that makes everything invisible! I gotta get me some of that, imagine the places I could sneak into! Oooh invisible construction workers too, not sure about that one though. Wolf whistles are annoying enough for us girls without not knowing where they're coming from.

A job like this would require large cranes or lifting helicopters and I am pretty sure someone like David Copperfield could make them disappear into thin air too. I guess we just have to wait for Fox to come out with another episode of Magic's Biggest Secrets Revealed with that creepy guy in the mask and then the whole conspiracy will be blown wide open.

NoahFence · 4th September 2011, 12:49 PM

Originally Posted by bill smith

If they hung that netting they use over the areas they worked on nobody would notice a thing Dash. You know it.

WHAT?!?!

Dude. It was a TUESDAY morning. A work day. You know, with people inside, outside, and everywhere? The vast majority of which were not blind, so they can see 1,000 feet into the air on a clear late summer day.

Each and every thing you truthers make up is exponentially more idiotic and stupid as the one before.

GIVE IT UP

bill smith · 4th September 2011, 12:57 PM

Originally Posted by Blaupunkt69

A job like this would require large cranes or lifting helicopters and I am pretty sure someone like David Copperfield could make them disappear into thin air too. I guess we just have to wait for Fox to come out with another episode of Magic's Biggest Secrets Revealed with that creepy guy in the mask and then the whole conspiracy will be blown wide open.

They could have cut the original columns out in smaller sections and sent the pieces down in the freight elevators. The much lighter replacement columns could have then been mounted in sections in the place of the original steel columns. It would have been pretty easy to do.

tmd2_1 · 4th September 2011, 01:12 PM

Originally Posted by Grizzly Bear

The flash happens upon first contact with the wall, and it creates enough friction to generate sparks as it does so. Friction between two objects releases heat energy, as you know full well. The "other flash" you refer to is not apparent in any other video shot of the aircraft and frankly you've done nothing but speculate when the answer to your question was a simple look into a physics book.

Bill Smith I see from the quotes is being his usual self; suggesting the columns themselves must have been replaced to make them weaker. The sheer stupidity of that idea is only matched by the thinking that a passenger airliner was firing a missile into the building with nothing to show for evidence except for a frame artifact in a single video out of hundreds

Ok listen here is a video of a plane hitting a wall notice a flash out about 24 seconds. See how it looks like sparks? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZjhx...eature=related
That's how a flash would look like after impact regardless of what's causing it, friction, oxygen tank..etc.

Compare that with this video (same as before) see the almost perfectly circular flash? Impossible to have that after impact.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cw3dz...eature=related

That flash coming out of the back of the A/C is certainly there. Here is a good quality video made by a member here. You can see it at about the 2-3 second mark.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPlt6...eature=related

You seem to have a lot of anger about this. I would suggest re-directing it. I had nothing to do with the events of that day, and it's not my fault things are the way they are. You should take whatever emotions you are feeling and direct it in more positive direction. Perhaps even towards asking questions, and demanding answers.

tmd2_1 · 4th September 2011, 01:19 PM

Originally Posted by fess

Nice dodge.

Since when did airport security have anything to do with servicing the aircraft? So far, the only ones that “Trutherville” hasn’t implicated in this conspiracy are the parking lot attendants.

You cannot continue to speculate about this missile being used if you can’t show how this missile was attached to the aircraft to begin with.

Like I said, it’s very simple. Just show who, what, where, how, and when.

I'm not dodging anything. Anything I could say is pure speculation. It certainly could be done. It's not that hard to mount a commercial A/C with a projectile missile. You are asking me questions I can't possibly answer. I've often said the planes not being piloted by human hands, is the most difficult part of any conspiracy theory. Such an important part would not have been left to human hands. I don't know how it was done (assuming it was done) I do know if there was a conspiracy, it would have had to have been done.

AJM8125 · 4th September 2011, 01:25 PM

Originally Posted by tmd2_1

Ok listen here is a video of a plane hitting a wall notice a flash out about 24 seconds. See how it looks like sparks? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZjhx...eature=related
That's how a flash would look like after impact regardless of what's causing it, friction, oxygen tank..etc.

Compare that with this video (same as before) see the almost perfectly circular flash? Impossible to have that after impact.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cw3dz...eature=related

That flash coming out of the back of the A/C is certainly there. Here is a good quality video made by a member here. You can see it at about the 2-3 second mark.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPlt6...eature=related

You seem to have a lot of anger about this. I would suggest re-directing it. I had nothing to do with the events of that day, and it's not my fault things are the way they are. You should take whatever emotions you are feeling and direct it in more positive direction. Perhaps even towards asking questions, and demanding answers.

*Cough COUGH!*

tmd2_1 · 4th September 2011, 01:26 PM

Originally Posted by djlunacee

So your JAQqing off? Then why refuse to listen to the answers given by those who are professionals in the relevant fields?

Really? Who?

Progress! Admitting you don't know something! Maybe you might try to listen to those here who do.

This may be one of the silliest things I have ever heard. Please reread and think about what you are saying here.

You have contacted the insurance companies who paid out millions in insurance claims to American and United Airlines? I am sure they would be interested to know there is a possibility they paid out when they didn't need to, right? Or could it be they had no doubt, that the planes identified as flights 11,175,77,93 were paid out on the proper insurance claims?

Do you understand what happens when a planes transponder is turned off?

Only one answer was even possible, though I have not found any data that suggests anything like we saw is a static discharge. That also doesn't even begin to explain the flash coming out of the back of the A/C.

I'm sure insurance companies can handle there own business. I find it inexcusable that the serial numbers were never verified. Yet "debunkers" have no problem with this.

What a transponder is turned off? Well why didn't the same thing happen to Flight 11? Why does it appear (I can't say with 100% determination) that the plane was flying AWAY from New York? Something that never should have happened that day. This is all the more reason why those serial numbers should have been identified.

George152 · 4th September 2011, 01:27 PM

Originally Posted by leftysergeant

Did you know that it is possible to blow your brains out with a paper bullet?

ETA: I am NOT suggesting that any bleedin drongo try this, because I know that they will succede, and I will get blamed for it.

The classical 'nobrainer' ?

tmd2_1 · 4th September 2011, 01:28 PM

Originally Posted by AJM8125

*Cough COUGH!*

You want to talk about the Sun? Why was the same thing seen at the North Tower? The sun moved that much in 15 minutes?

NoahFence · 4th September 2011, 01:28 PM

Sad. Very sad.

Continual ignorance, hand-waving, JAQing off. Not a shred of honesty or integrity in any post a truther makes.

"We need an expert"

"I am an expert"

"But we need and expert"

etc..etc..etc.....

AJM8125 · 4th September 2011, 01:29 PM

Originally Posted by tmd2_1

I'm not dodging anything. Anything I could say is pure speculation. It certainly could be done. It's not that hard to mount a commercial A/C with a projectile missile. You are asking me questions I can't possibly answer. I've often said the planes not being piloted by human hands, is the most difficult part of any conspiracy theory. Such an important part would not have been left to human hands. I don't know how it was done (assuming it was done) I do know if there was a conspiracy, it would have had to have been done.

If it's so easy, then please explain how it is.

Oh that's right - you don't really know anything at all, you just "know" things.

AJM8125 · 4th September 2011, 01:30 PM

Originally Posted by tmd2_1

You want to talk about the Sun? Why was the same thing seen at the North Tower? The sun moved that much in 15 minutes?

Another dodge noted, or is it a reading comprehension issue?

3rd September 2011, 08:20 PM	#801
Grizzly Bear このマスクによっ Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 5,690	Originally Posted by tmd2_1 Explain any of these to me? It hasn't been done yet. Oh? Then why is it is every physics book that this phenomenon called "friction" is discussed? Things like energy created in the form of heat because of the friction occuring between two different materials... Is there any compelling reason why this should be ignored? Quote: Energy from friction creates heat. For example when you rub your hands, sharpen a pencil, make a skid mark with your bike, or use the brakes on your car, friction generates heat. Source Example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3tiGbrVlptQ Maybe if you're looking for an elementary school explanation, you could try this: Quote: Making Heat How do you make heat? You could burn things (chemical reactions), or you could rub things together (friction). source
Grizzly Bear このマスクによっ Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 5,690	__________________ Graduation on 8/13/2011 8D Last edited by Grizzly Bear; 3rd September 2011 at 08:24 PM.

3rd September 2011, 08:33 PM	#802
tmd2_1 Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 1,657	Originally Posted by Grizzly Bear Oh? Then why is it is every physics book that this phenomenon called "friction" is discussed? Things like energy created in the form of heat because of the friction occuring between two different materials... Is there any compelling reason why this should be ignored? Source Example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3tiGbrVlptQ Maybe if you're looking for an elementary school explanation, you could try this: source Yeah because the flash happens before impact, and it wouldn't even begin to explain the flash/flame coming out of the A/C.
tmd2_1 Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 1,657

4th September 2011, 02:10 AM	#804
bill smith Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 8,408	Originally Posted by atavisms Maybe that stuff is true but I think it hurts 9-11 truth to use it. I dont think there would be a need (or surreptitious manner) in which to replace the perimeter columns! The fuel in the wings and the engines were the most substantial parts of the planes and at that speed tore right through those hollow perimeter columns/wall assemblies, leaving their rough outline on the buildings facade. If I were you I would just stick to the facts that prove the use of explosives: There is NOTHING theoretical about these facts: -The speed and symmetry in the destruction of wtc 1,2&7 -WTC7's implosion -The Squibs and the Explosiveness of wtc 1&2 which literally erupted creating massive debris fields, pulverizing most of the 160 tons of concrete and blasting it, the superstructures and perimeter wall assemblies and building contents all over the surrounding streets! The streets were strewn with thousands of body parts. And despite a two years search for human remains (at Freshkills Landfill, SI) there remained no discernible genetic trace of 1100 human beings. They remain: 'unaccounted for.' -The witness and first responder testimony. -The 99 day fires. With excessive heat *up to 2800f days after 9/11 (see Bechtel and NASA readings even weeks late). -The elemental iron microspheres -the Molten metal: See: fema bpat http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evid...WTC_apndxC.htm -NIST's refusal to even test for explosives despite the procedural mandate to do so. And what their spokesperson said when asked. 'why not?' 'Its a waste of time to look for something that isn't present" they replied. -Danish hero Dr Niels Harrit et al's study is undeniable proof of the presence of advance-engineered thermitic explosives in the WTC dust. Like the Anthrax attacks of the same time period, it leads right back to US military labs and contractors. And the highly revealing clip used in The NORTH TOWER EXPLODING VIDEO http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSApOavkHg8 There's more.. but this should be enough for most reasonable people to realize that, at the very least, a proper investigation (you know, one that actually considers the evidence and does not begin with it's conclusions) is needed. I agree with most of what you say but I do not believe, and am not willing to assume that the delicate aircraft slid through the steel wall of the WTC as if you could slip your hand into a mirror. That is impossible. So that leaves me with the choice of believing in no-planes (for which there is ample evidence it must be said) and looking at the possibility that the columns in the impact area were replaced with something much weaker than steel to facilitate the entrance of the aircraft into the building in the manner we saw. I know which of these two choices would be easist for the perps to implement. Do you agree ?
bill smith Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 8,408	__________________ Think WTC7 - You cannot make the four corners of a table fall together unless you cut the four legs together A kitchen table judgement on a world scale is enough * To Citizens: 'There comes a time when silence is betrayal'

4th September 2011, 02:55 AM	#805
The Platypus Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 1,787	Originally Posted by bill smith I agree with most of what you say but I do not believe, and am not willing to assume that the delicate aircraft slid through the steel wall of the WTC as if you could slip your hand into a mirror. That is impossible. So that leaves me with the choice of believing in no-planes (for which there is ample evidence it must be said) and looking at the possibility that the columns in the impact area were replaced with something much weaker than steel to facilitate the entrance of the aircraft into the building in the manner we saw. I know which of these two choices would be easist for the perps to implement. Do you agree ? I know an easier choice that makes even more sense... You are wrong. What is it with 911 kooks that they can't ever be mature enough to admit that they could be wrong about anything. Why is it so much easier to believe in lies, even as ridiculous as "no planes", than it is to admit to yourself that you don't understand some things and that you don't know everything. Weird...
	__________________ I'll go with the qualified experts, over some ranting guy on the internet that claims he has "the truth". Always beware of those that overuse, capitalize and blanket themselves in them word "truth". I may not always know the truth, but i do know when i'm being lied too. Last edited by The Platypus; 4th September 2011 at 03:01 AM.

4th September 2011, 03:02 AM	#806
bill smith Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 8,408	Originally Posted by The Platypus I know an easier choice... You are wrong. What is it with 911 kooks that they can't ever be mature enough to admit that they could be wrong about anything. Is it so much easier for you to believe in lies, even as ridiculous as "no planes", than it is for you to admit to yourself that you don't understand physics. Weird... That's the very point. Replacing sections of the perimeter columns in the impact areas with fake columns of a weaker material than the original steel is much LESS exotic than the no-planes theory.
bill smith Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 8,408	__________________ Think WTC7 - You cannot make the four corners of a table fall together unless you cut the four legs together A kitchen table judgement on a world scale is enough * To Citizens: 'There comes a time when silence is betrayal'

3rd September 2011, 10:11 PM	#803
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,480	Originally Posted by tmd2_1 Yeah because the flash happens before impact, and it wouldn't even begin to explain the flash/flame coming out of the A/C. It has been explained to you,but you appear to be too obtuse to understand. How far have you got with physics at your school?

4th September 2011, 03:17 AM	#807
The Platypus Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 1,787	Originally Posted by bill smith That's the very point. Replacing sections of the perimeter columns in the impact areas with fake columns of a weaker material than the original steel is much LESS exotic than the no-planes theory. That you are wrong about the entire scenario to begin with and that you just don't understand physics enough, is the most plausible and the least exotic theory.
	__________________ I'll go with the qualified experts, over some ranting guy on the internet that claims he has "the truth". Always beware of those that overuse, capitalize and blanket themselves in them word "truth". I may not always know the truth, but i do know when i'm being lied too.

4th September 2011, 03:54 AM	#808
Blaupunkt69 Scholar Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Bowen Island, BC Posts: 57	Originally Posted by tmd2_1 Well there's several scenarios I can think of, but Airport security at the highest levels would have had to have been involved. Security at all 3 airports just happened to be run by the same company at the time. Coincidence I'm sure. If airport security was involved it is possible. For me to give scenario's would only be speculation on my part. This thread was started as a question, I was looking for an explanation for the flash(es) so far I have only seen one that seems to be possible at all. But seems extremely unlikely, and that's static discharge. Airport security was involved in this conspiracy too? How many people would that be roughly? What is the total number of people needed to pull off your conspiracy fantasy? Is it the more the merrier or do conspiracies work better when you have fewer people in on it?

4th September 2011, 04:10 AM	#809
leftysergeant Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Spanaway WA Posts: 18,613	Originally Posted by bill smith So that leaves me with the choice of believing in no-planes (for which there is ample evidence it must be said) and looking at the possibility that the columns in the impact area were replaced with something much weaker than steel to facilitate the entrance of the aircraft into the building in the manner we saw. This is more plausible than THIS. It is also equally probably that Elvis has been hiding out in the Hindu Kush for thirty years waiting for a chance to live in an actual Christian nation some day. There is no way to replace the steel columns with another material unobserved. It is also impossible to break them in the manner observed other than to hit them with a solid object shaped like the hole seen in the side of the buildings. The only thing in the world shaped like that, and of the appropriate size, is an passenger aircraft about the size of a 757. Sorry, no cigar.
	__________________ No civilization ever collapsed because the poor had too much to eat.

4th September 2011, 04:14 AM	#810
leftysergeant Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Spanaway WA Posts: 18,613	Originally Posted by bill smith I agree with most of what you say but I do not believe, and am not willing to assume that the delicate aircraft slid through the steel wall of the WTC as if you could slip your hand into a mirror. That is impossible. Did you know that it is possible to blow your brains out with a paper bullet? ETA: I am NOT suggesting that any bleedin drongo try this, because I know that they will succede, and I will get blamed for it.
	__________________ No civilization ever collapsed because the poor had too much to eat. Last edited by leftysergeant; 4th September 2011 at 04:15 AM.

4th September 2011, 05:48 AM	#811
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 49,098	Originally Posted by tmd2_1 Well there's several scenarios I can think of, but Airport security at the highest levels would have had to have been involved. Security at all 3 airports just happened to be run by the same company at the time. Coincidence I'm sure. If airport security was involved it is possible. For me to give scenario's would only be speculation on my part. This thread was started as a question, I was looking for an explanation for the flash(es) so far I have only seen one that seems to be possible at all. But seems extremely unlikely, and that's static discharge. Your incredibly huge list of co-conspirators gets even larger...

4th September 2011, 05:56 AM	#812
tjlance1 Scholar Join Date: Jun 2011 Posts: 88	It's truly a waste of time trying to rationally speak to truthers..as ten years have gone by, the more their claims are proven wrong, the wilder the claims become. It's a snowball effect. Unconsciously, they realize that what they believed isn't true, so in order to perpetuate their belief, a new theory is developed. Unfortunately for truthers, there is NOTHING that supports their belief...
tjlance1 Scholar Join Date: Jun 2011 Posts: 88

4th September 2011, 06:06 AM	#813
Dash80 Blitzkrieg Bop Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Home Sweet Home Posts: 1,560	Originally Posted by tmd2_1 Yeah because the flash happens before impact, and it wouldn't even begin to explain the flash/flame coming out of the A/C. points and laughs Oh tmd you do make me chuckle. Physics wasn't my best subject but even I understand friction!
	__________________ I see that the No-Planers still travel Air Elastic-Band with their fleet of innovative rubber Boeings.

4th September 2011, 06:54 AM	#814
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,480	Tmd is confusing friction and fiction.

4th September 2011, 07:07 AM	#815
Grizzly Bear このマスクによっ Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 5,690	Originally Posted by tmd2_1 Yeah because the flash happens before impact, and it wouldn't even begin to explain the flash/flame coming out of the A/C. The flash happens upon first contact with the wall, and it creates enough friction to generate sparks as it does so. Friction between two objects releases heat energy, as you know full well. The "other flash" you refer to is not apparent in any other video shot of the aircraft and frankly you've done nothing but speculate when the answer to your question was a simple look into a physics book. Bill Smith I see from the quotes is being his usual self; suggesting the columns themselves must have been replaced to make them weaker. The sheer stupidity of that idea is only matched by the thinking that a passenger airliner was firing a missile into the building with nothing to show for evidence except for a frame artifact in a single video out of hundreds
Grizzly Bear このマスクによっ Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 5,690	__________________ Graduation on 8/13/2011 8D

4th September 2011, 07:24 AM	#816
Dash80 Blitzkrieg Bop Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Home Sweet Home Posts: 1,560	Originally Posted by bill smith That's the very point. Replacing sections of the perimeter columns in the impact areas with fake columns of a weaker material than the original steel is much LESS exotic than the no-planes theory. Ok bill whatever you say. Replacing a large number of exterior column assemblies on New York's two tallest buildings... without anyone noticing. Sure, very plausible! Even killer cream pies sounds more sane than that.
	__________________ I see that the No-Planers still travel Air Elastic-Band with their fleet of innovative rubber Boeings.

4th September 2011, 07:48 AM	#817
Animal Graduate Poster Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: SE Michigan Posts: 1,369	Originally Posted by The Platypus That you are wrong about the entire scenario to begin with and that you just don't understand physics enough, is the most plausible and the least exotic theory. Why is it such a hard concept to accept for troofers, that the horizontal loading caused by the impact of the aircraft far exceeded the failure points of the steel columns that were never design for such loads?

4th September 2011, 08:47 AM	#818
Dash80 Blitzkrieg Bop Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Home Sweet Home Posts: 1,560	Originally Posted by Animal Why is it such a hard concept to accept for troofers, that the horizontal loading caused by the impact of the aircraft far exceeded the failure points of the steel columns that were never design for such loads? Because they prefer ignorance? It's funny, the famous Frank De Martini quote concerning the ability of the towers to survive "multiple jet impacts" also contains the information that they would still penetrate the structure. Truthers (mostly no planers/missile loons) trot out the survival quote and ignore the rest.
	__________________ I see that the No-Planers still travel Air Elastic-Band with their fleet of innovative rubber Boeings.

4th September 2011, 08:55 AM	#819
djlunacee Muse Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Kernersville, NC Posts: 566	Originally Posted by tmd2_1 First of all this is not a "theory" it is a question. I certainly don't base the whole collapse of the towers on whether or not that was missile. Far from it. A question that no one has really given much of a plausible answer to. In fact only one is at all possible. Although I have found no evidence of any discharge looking anything like what we see. So your JAQqing off? Then why refuse to listen to the answers given by those who are professionals in the relevant fields? Originally Posted by tmd2_1 No I don't mean the U.S government. I mean a relatively small criminal cabal inside of it, a cabal that also includes people from other countries, as well as some other "elite". Really? Who? Originally Posted by tmd2_1 I've never once claimed hushaboom bombs or anything like that. First of all there are numerous eye witnesses that say they heard explosions. So I do not know what may have or may not have been used. Progress! Admitting you don't know something! Maybe you might try to listen to those here who do. Originally Posted by tmd2_1 Why would they want to eliminate fall back? Simple they would want as little of the plane to be found as possible. Because the parts may not match what they should have been. This may be one of the silliest things I have ever heard. Please reread and think about what you are saying here. Originally Posted by tmd2_1 Now I know you will say, parts were found, this is true. But it may surprise you to know (and this has all been covered in this thread previously) that no parts serial numbers have been publicly declared to match what they should have been. It doesn't even look like it was done at all. See here http://911blogger.com/node/14406 You have contacted the insurance companies who paid out millions in insurance claims to American and United Airlines? I am sure they would be interested to know there is a possibility they paid out when they didn't need to, right? Or could it be they had no doubt, that the planes identified as flights 11,175,77,93 were paid out on the proper insurance claims? Originally Posted by tmd2_1 Now you can say there is no doubt as to what the planes were, so there is no need to look into it. Well I can give several answers. First this is not a very difficult thing to do. You get the serial, and enter into a database to see which plane it belongs. Or you can look at the serial numbers it should have been through that database, and see if they match the numbers found. It's not like DNA testing which is expensive and timely. Also there's recorded evidence that the flight was still in the air according to flight explorer. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdXGSefI6pM Do you understand what happens when a planes transponder is turned off?
	__________________ My scars remind me, that my past is real.....

4th September 2011, 09:06 AM	#820
fess Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Hiding in the sticks. Posts: 1,042	Originally Posted by tmd2_1 Well there's several scenarios I can think of, but Airport security at the highest levels would have had to have been involved. Security at all 3 airports just happened to be run by the same company at the time. Coincidence I'm sure. If airport security was involved it is possible. For me to give scenario's would only be speculation on my part. This thread was started as a question, I was looking for an explanation for the flash(es) so far I have only seen one that seems to be possible at all. But seems extremely unlikely, and that's static discharge. Nice dodge. Since when did airport security have anything to do with servicing the aircraft? So far, the only ones that “Trutherville” hasn’t implicated in this conspiracy are the parking lot attendants. You cannot continue to speculate about this missile being used if you can’t show how this missile was attached to the aircraft to begin with. Like I said, it’s very simple. Just show who, what, where, how, and when.
	__________________ My boss told me to stop procrastinating. I think I will… tomorrow.

4th September 2011, 09:40 AM	#821
I Ratant Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 15,305	. After watching some of the Nat Geo coverage, pissing on the graves of everyone who died that day is all these seriously deranged disturbed sick examples of the lowest form of human can accomplish.

4th September 2011, 10:28 AM	#822
The Platypus Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 1,787	Originally Posted by I Ratant . After watching some of the Nat Geo coverage, pissing on the graves of everyone who died that day is all these seriously deranged disturbed sick examples of the lowest form of human can accomplish. I'd even go as far as to consider them traitors.
	__________________ I'll go with the qualified experts, over some ranting guy on the internet that claims he has "the truth". Always beware of those that overuse, capitalize and blanket themselves in them word "truth". I may not always know the truth, but i do know when i'm being lied too.

4th September 2011, 10:55 AM	#823
bill smith Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 8,408	Originally Posted by Dash80 Ok bill whatever you say. Replacing a large number of exterior column assemblies on New York's two tallest buildings... without anyone noticing. Sure, very plausible! Even killer cream pies sounds more sane than that. If they hung that netting they use over the areas they worked on nobody would notice a thing Dash. You know it.
bill smith Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 8,408	__________________ Think WTC7 - You cannot make the four corners of a table fall together unless you cut the four legs together A kitchen table judgement on a world scale is enough * To Citizens: 'There comes a time when silence is betrayal'

4th September 2011, 11:00 AM	#824
cyclonic Muse Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Australia Posts: 977	Originally Posted by bill smith If they hung that netting they use over the areas they worked on nobody would notice a thing Dash. You know it. Bill have you being eating those mushrooms again? You know it.
	__________________ All of these 9/11 conspiracy sites on the internet have museum-grade idiots stating what 'obviously' happens at velocities and temperatures that they are flat-out incapable of understanding. Not only are these people too stupid to understand the physics involved with what they are bloviating about -- they are too stupid to realize how stupid they really are.

4th September 2011, 11:06 AM	#825
Animal Graduate Poster Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: SE Michigan Posts: 1,369	Originally Posted by cyclonic Bill have you being eating those mushrooms again? You know it. He has to be.....considering this.....

4th September 2011, 11:15 AM	#826
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 49,098	Originally Posted by fess Nice dodge. I saw an awesome '69 Charger being towed down the highway the other day (presumably to an auto show/auction), it was immaculate! eta: no, it was not painted like the General Lee.

4th September 2011, 11:42 AM	#827
I Ratant Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 15,305	Originally Posted by WildCat I saw an awesome '69 Charger being towed down the highway the other day (presumably to an auto show/auction), it was immaculate! eta: no, it was not painted like the General Lee. . There was a car lot off to the south of the Burbank airport where the General Lees rested between takes. Bunch of them there.

4th September 2011, 12:07 PM	#828
Dash80 Blitzkrieg Bop Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Home Sweet Home Posts: 1,560	Originally Posted by bill smith If they hung that netting they use over the areas they worked on nobody would notice a thing Dash. You know it. Oooh netting that makes everything invisible! I gotta get me some of that, imagine the places I could sneak into! Oooh invisible construction workers too, not sure about that one though. Wolf whistles are annoying enough for us girls without not knowing where they're coming from.
	__________________ I see that the No-Planers still travel Air Elastic-Band with their fleet of innovative rubber Boeings.

4th September 2011, 12:46 PM	#829
Blaupunkt69 Scholar Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Bowen Island, BC Posts: 57	Originally Posted by Dash80 Oooh netting that makes everything invisible! I gotta get me some of that, imagine the places I could sneak into! Oooh invisible construction workers too, not sure about that one though. Wolf whistles are annoying enough for us girls without not knowing where they're coming from. A job like this would require large cranes or lifting helicopters and I am pretty sure someone like David Copperfield could make them disappear into thin air too. I guess we just have to wait for Fox to come out with another episode of Magic's Biggest Secrets Revealed with that creepy guy in the mask and then the whole conspiracy will be blown wide open.

4th September 2011, 12:49 PM	#830
NoahFence Psycho Kitty Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Patriot Nation Posts: 9,322	Originally Posted by bill smith If they hung that netting they use over the areas they worked on nobody would notice a thing Dash. You know it. WHAT?!?! Dude. It was a TUESDAY morning. A work day. You know, with people inside, outside, and everywhere? The vast majority of which were not blind, so they can see 1,000 feet into the air on a clear late summer day. Each and every thing you truthers make up is exponentially more idiotic and stupid as the one before. GIVE IT UP
	__________________ Our truest life is when we are in our dreams awake. -Henry David Thoreau

4th September 2011, 12:57 PM	#831
bill smith Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 8,408	Originally Posted by Blaupunkt69 A job like this would require large cranes or lifting helicopters and I am pretty sure someone like David Copperfield could make them disappear into thin air too. I guess we just have to wait for Fox to come out with another episode of Magic's Biggest Secrets Revealed with that creepy guy in the mask and then the whole conspiracy will be blown wide open. They could have cut the original columns out in smaller sections and sent the pieces down in the freight elevators. The much lighter replacement columns could have then been mounted in sections in the place of the original steel columns. It would have been pretty easy to do.
bill smith Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 8,408	__________________ Think WTC7 - You cannot make the four corners of a table fall together unless you cut the four legs together A kitchen table judgement on a world scale is enough * To Citizens: 'There comes a time when silence is betrayal' Last edited by bill smith; 4th September 2011 at 12:59 PM.

4th September 2011, 01:12 PM	#832
tmd2_1 Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 1,657	Originally Posted by Grizzly Bear The flash happens upon first contact with the wall, and it creates enough friction to generate sparks as it does so. Friction between two objects releases heat energy, as you know full well. The "other flash" you refer to is not apparent in any other video shot of the aircraft and frankly you've done nothing but speculate when the answer to your question was a simple look into a physics book. Bill Smith I see from the quotes is being his usual self; suggesting the columns themselves must have been replaced to make them weaker. The sheer stupidity of that idea is only matched by the thinking that a passenger airliner was firing a missile into the building with nothing to show for evidence except for a frame artifact in a single video out of hundreds Ok listen here is a video of a plane hitting a wall notice a flash out about 24 seconds. See how it looks like sparks? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZjhx...eature=related That's how a flash would look like after impact regardless of what's causing it, friction, oxygen tank..etc. Compare that with this video (same as before) see the almost perfectly circular flash? Impossible to have that after impact. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cw3dz...eature=related That flash coming out of the back of the A/C is certainly there. Here is a good quality video made by a member here. You can see it at about the 2-3 second mark. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPlt6...eature=related You seem to have a lot of anger about this. I would suggest re-directing it. I had nothing to do with the events of that day, and it's not my fault things are the way they are. You should take whatever emotions you are feeling and direct it in more positive direction. Perhaps even towards asking questions, and demanding answers.
tmd2_1 Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 1,657	Last edited by tmd2_1; 4th September 2011 at 01:20 PM.

4th September 2011, 01:19 PM	#833
tmd2_1 Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 1,657	Originally Posted by fess Nice dodge. Since when did airport security have anything to do with servicing the aircraft? So far, the only ones that “Trutherville” hasn’t implicated in this conspiracy are the parking lot attendants. You cannot continue to speculate about this missile being used if you can’t show how this missile was attached to the aircraft to begin with. Like I said, it’s very simple. Just show who, what, where, how, and when. I'm not dodging anything. Anything I could say is pure speculation. It certainly could be done. It's not that hard to mount a commercial A/C with a projectile missile. You are asking me questions I can't possibly answer. I've often said the planes not being piloted by human hands, is the most difficult part of any conspiracy theory. Such an important part would not have been left to human hands. I don't know how it was done (assuming it was done) I do know if there was a conspiracy, it would have had to have been done.
tmd2_1 Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 1,657

4th September 2011, 01:25 PM	#834
AJM8125 NWO Black Ops Tagger Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: **** Creek, California Posts: 15,254	Originally Posted by tmd2_1 Ok listen here is a video of a plane hitting a wall notice a flash out about 24 seconds. See how it looks like sparks? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZjhx...eature=related That's how a flash would look like after impact regardless of what's causing it, friction, oxygen tank..etc. Compare that with this video (same as before) see the almost perfectly circular flash? Impossible to have that after impact. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cw3dz...eature=related That flash coming out of the back of the A/C is certainly there. Here is a good quality video made by a member here. You can see it at about the 2-3 second mark. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPlt6...eature=related You seem to have a lot of anger about this. I would suggest re-directing it. I had nothing to do with the events of that day, and it's not my fault things are the way they are. You should take whatever emotions you are feeling and direct it in more positive direction. Perhaps even towards asking questions, and demanding answers. *Cough COUGH!*

4th September 2011, 01:26 PM	#835
tmd2_1 Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 1,657	Originally Posted by djlunacee So your JAQqing off? Then why refuse to listen to the answers given by those who are professionals in the relevant fields? Really? Who? Progress! Admitting you don't know something! Maybe you might try to listen to those here who do. This may be one of the silliest things I have ever heard. Please reread and think about what you are saying here. You have contacted the insurance companies who paid out millions in insurance claims to American and United Airlines? I am sure they would be interested to know there is a possibility they paid out when they didn't need to, right? Or could it be they had no doubt, that the planes identified as flights 11,175,77,93 were paid out on the proper insurance claims? Do you understand what happens when a planes transponder is turned off? Only one answer was even possible, though I have not found any data that suggests anything like we saw is a static discharge. That also doesn't even begin to explain the flash coming out of the back of the A/C. I'm sure insurance companies can handle there own business. I find it inexcusable that the serial numbers were never verified. Yet "debunkers" have no problem with this. What a transponder is turned off? Well why didn't the same thing happen to Flight 11? Why does it appear (I can't say with 100% determination) that the plane was flying AWAY from New York? Something that never should have happened that day. This is all the more reason why those serial numbers should have been identified.
tmd2_1 Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 1,657