Newton's Third Law called...

[LTS TRN 2]

It wants a return to basic reality... :wink:

https://www.bitchute.com/video/K5SCmVx68TGz/

[Kierland]

Nice spam.

[Softball Bat]

It wants a return to basic reality... :wink:

https://www.bitchute.com/video/K5SCmVx68TGz/

Not clicking.

Video synopsis?

[LTS TRN 2]

Who cares about the site, it's the specific vid and its contents that count. Of course the willful denial of anything to upset the fatuous official story remains embedded in the huddled masses. But the facts are clear. An airliner cannot just slice through a steel-framed building--and even come out the other side!!! It's outrageous and yet through careful and steady manipulation of the media--including scrubbing as best as possible any vids and testimonies of witnesses--the Biggest Lie Ever continues.

Sloppy, the vid demonstrates first what a mere bird strike does to an airliner's nose. And then we see witnesses who clearly witnessed a bomb going off as the second tower exploded. And notice the difference between the first strike and the second. Why should the first have had no explosion at all, while the second (when everyone was watching) was tremendous and completely disproportionate to the amount of fuel in the supposed airliner.

[Smackie Chan]

Your credibility remains approaching zero in the rear view mirror.

[LTS TRN 2]

But Smackie, you can't dispute, let alone refute, anything I've said. :P

[Left Seater]

What is behind the nose cone on a modern airliner?

Is that space pressurized?

Is the same thickness of aluminum used as on other parts of the airframe?

[LTS TRN 2]

Let's hope not, since a mere bird strike crushes the nose of a 757. But on that fateful day, the nose miraculously pierced right through the massive--and recently reinforced--concrete wall of the pentagon--and then just kept on going, piercing through two more rings of the giant building's base.

And curiously the nose struck the pentagon wall at ten-feet above the ground (good flying there) though the huge engines hang fifteen-feet below the nose. Well to be fair, there were a whole lot of violations of basic physics that day, not only at the pentagon. :wink:

[Mikey]

word vomit

[smackaholic]

What is behind the nose cone on a modern airliner?

Is that space pressurized?

Is the same thickness of aluminum used as on other parts of the airframe?

Pretty sure it isn't even metal. Nose cones are fiberglass because they have a radar dish behind them.

[smackaholic]

Let's hope not, since a mere bird strike crushes the nose of a 757. But on that fateful day, the nose miraculously pierced right through the massive--and recently reinforced--concrete wall of the pentagon--and then just kept on going, piercing through two more rings of the giant building's base.

And curiously the nose struck the pentagon wall at ten-feet above the ground (good flying there) though the huge engines hang fifteen-feet below the nose. Well to be fair, there were a whole lot of violations of basic physics that day, not only at the pentagon. :wink:

Assuming it hit at 10 feet above the ground. we can assume it had to have a reasonably steep glide slope. So, even though the engines are lower. they wouldn't have touched the ground before the nose did.

And pointing to the fact that a thin, unpressurized nose cone was dented is comical. The nosecone didn't bore a hole through the building. The 150,000 lbs, give or take, behind it traveling at 30o mph behind it did.

As for the pilots being skillful, I doubt it. If they had hit a little higher, I suspect they would have caused more damage.

[Left Seater]

The nose cone over the radar dish is generally fiberglass with some aluminum strips added for lightning protection. That area isn't pressurized either, so it has little of the stout structure the remainder of the plane has as it isn't dealing with much in the way of high stress.

[LTS TRN 2]

Let's hope not, since a mere bird strike crushes the nose of a 757. But on that fateful day, the nose miraculously pierced right through the massive--and recently reinforced--concrete wall of the pentagon--and then just kept on going, piercing through two more rings of the giant building's base.

And curiously the nose struck the pentagon wall at ten-feet above the ground (good flying there) though the huge engines hang fifteen-feet below the nose. Well to be fair, there were a whole lot of violations of basic physics that day, not only at the pentagon. :wink:

Assuming it hit at 10 feet above the ground. we can assume it had to have a reasonably steep glide slope. So, even though the engines are lower. they wouldn't have touched the ground before the nose did.

And pointing to the fact that a thin, unpressurized nose cone was dented is comical. The nosecone didn't bore a hole through the building. The 150,000 lbs, give or take, behind it traveling at 30o mph behind it did.

As for the pilots being skillful, I doubt it. If they had hit a little higher, I suspect they would have caused more damage.

No, Smackie, because if the airliner had come in at an angle--any downward angle--it certainly wouldn't have pierced straight through THREE RINGS at ground level, arriving at the third ring still punching the same ten-foot diameter hole. Gee, a 757 is a LOT bigger than ten-feet in diameter. And the engines would have crashed into the walls right where there was NO DAMAGE AT ALL. That's right, the windows weren't even broken where the massive engines would have smashed into them.

The very idea of a 757 hitting the pentagon at all is absurd. It would have been a gigantic fiery pile of debris. And yet a CNN reporter first on the scene said there was no evidence or indication at all that any airplane had crashed, let alone a 757.

How do you clowns possibly maintain this nonsense?

[LTS TRN 2]

It's a completely bullshit comparison. Jones was basically on his own making admittedly outrageous accusations.

But as far as the utter falsity of the official 9/11 story, do you even know who was on the 9/11 Commission? Of course not. And are you aware that thousands of architects, engineers, pilots, and firefighters--and of course the entire demolition industry--insist along with me that of course all three WTC towers were dropped by controlled demolition? And that no reputable engineer or pilot has supported any part of the ludicrous pentagon narrative? Of course you don't. Because you're a fetal positioned coward. You're disgusting--and I watch what you idiots say. And you're really one of the worst.

[LTS TRN 2]

That is complete and utter bullshit. You are simply divorced from reality.

Really? Perhaps you could cite some expert who supports the official story? And no, the ludicrous Popular Mechanics explanation--nothing more than an attack on critics---doesn't count.

But of course you can't. All you've got--as we all can see--is just the scaredy cat pawings of mewling hollow denials and pissy personal attacks.

[Kierland]

That is complete and utter bullshit. You are simply divorced from reality.

What’s BS is you acting like you care about science when it’s a Covid thread and then just suspending all of that when it’s an inconvenient truth.

It’s expected from twats like LTurd, don’t know why I thought you were better than that.

[Screw_Michigan]

That is complete and utter bullshit. You are simply divorced from reality.

What’s BS is you acting like you care about science when it’s a Covid thread and then just suspending all of that when it’s an inconvenient truth.

It’s expected from twats like LTurd, don’t know why I thought you were better than that.

So what's your fukkin story here? Spit it out already. 9/11 was an inside job?



Do tell.

[Kierland]

That’s exactly what I’m talking about. You too claim to care about science when it’s Covid but for 9-11 it’s mock the other person and provide no science. “Who did it” isn’t science.

[Screw_Michigan]

That’s exactly what I’m talking about. You too claim to care about science when it’s Covid but for 9-11 it’s mock the other person and provide no science. “Who did it” isn’t science.

OK, fine then. Explain yourself. How exactly was 9/11 an inside job?

This should be rich.

[Kierland]

Can you fucking read? Who did it is not science.
Good god you suck at logic.
No wonder the righties beat your ass in arguments even when you have all the facts.
Pathetic.

[LTS TRN 2]

That’s exactly what I’m talking about. You too claim to care about science when it’s Covid but for 9-11 it’s mock the other person and provide no science. “Who did it” isn’t science.

OK, fine then. Explain yourself. How exactly was 9/11 an inside job?

This should be rich.

Okay, you want a detailed explanation? Fine, here ya go.


http://how911wasdone.blogspot.com/

[Roach]

And about one page down on that site:

"This blog is the verbal expression of an adaptive learning process. Please come back regularly."

Aka Lts favorite source is a bot.

And the site goes on:

"Ok, I admit. Some elements in this story are speculative"

Your credibility is now Way Further back in the rear view mirror. Are you not just a little embarrassed ?

[Smackie Chan]

Okay, you want a detailed explanation? Fine, here ya go.

From the linked blog post:

Ok, I admit. Some elements in this story are speculative. I do not know for instance if Atta was killed in Germany or in America. But the story is an coherent educated speculation. It is an attempt to reconstruct the events of 9/11...This story offers an integral explanation of what could have happened... Some elements remain vague, like what happened exactly to WTC7, flight77, flight93 or Mohamed Atta.

Translation: I made this shit up and have no proof that any of it actually occurred. But why let lack of evidence get in the way of a good story?

[Softball Bat]

haha!

[LTS TRN 2]

No, it's called responsible agnosticism. That is, the argument offered is of course speculative, but is based on obvious accumulated facts. It would be absurd to claim to know the precise details as though we had the room bugged when the various planning occurred.

As for the essential falsity of the whole official story, why does the obvious controlled dropping of WTC 7 not convince you? How can you accept that single affront to basic intelligence, let alone the myriad of others--the pentagon, Shankesville, etc. ???

Why do the believers in the official version never dare to address the obvious impossibilities?

[Smackie Chan]

Why do the believers in the official version never dare to address the obvious impossibilities?

Never said I do believe it; in fact, I've questioned it before in this forum. But I'm not gonna push unproven bullshit as an alternative. Not afraid to simply admit I don't know the truth.

[Softball Bat]

Lts favorite source is a bot.

[Kierland]

Why do the believers in the official version never dare to address the obvious impossibilities?

Never said I do believe it; in fact, I've questioned it before in this forum. But I'm not gonna push unproven bullshit as an alternative. Not afraid to simply admit I don't know the truth.

Reasonable response. As I recall you are in the “WTC 5 fell too? WTF is that!?!” Camp. Problem with evidence is if one part don’t fit it’s probably the wrong puzzle. Maybe at some point you will realize what that missing piece really means.

[LTS TRN 2]

Why do the believers in the official version never dare to address the obvious impossibilities?

Never said I do believe it; in fact, I've questioned it before in this forum. But I'm not gonna push unproven bullshit as an alternative. Not afraid to simply admit I don't know the truth.

Fair enough indeed. Because while you do acknowledge that the official story is obviously bullshit, you don't know what exactly what did happen. Yes, and this is precisely what I mean by Responsible Agnosticism, and it extends far beyond the conspiracies of our day.

As far as speculating on what did happen--as opposed to knowing what didn't--it's natural to weigh the odds and consider cui bono, etc. And given the obvious champing at the bit by the hooknosed neocons of PNAC with their very real suggestion of the necessity of a New Pearl Harbor, well the Mossad connection becomes an obvious suspect. But of course it's speculation. :wink:

[Kierland]

People saw this shit with their own eyes and still you spew this bullshit.

Might as well be saying that Japan wasn't the REAL cause of Pearl Harbor and the PROOF is that the Arizona is STILL leaking oil today.

Oh yeah who saw a plane hit the pentagon? And again if you had any science you would use it instead of making bad analogies instead of good ones, like if Dump had any evidence of voter fraud he would have already used it.

[Roach]

LTS

Nice backpedal and tap dance. As entertaining as your original posts.

You offer out all kinds of pure bullshit links, and your cred got busted again with this one.

Its not about the plane or the pentagon or about the missing secret shit or the yam Its about you being a bot bullshit generator.

We all know what you are. Carry on.

[Kierland]

Chip,
You must suck in court cause you walked right into that one.
The proper answer is: that’s not science, here is the science.
But you HAVE to change the subject. Cause you don’t have any science just like the my pillow guy has no actual evidence.

[LTS TRN 2]

LTS

Nice backpedal and tap dance. As entertaining as your original posts.

You offer out all kinds of pure bullshit links, and your cred got busted again with this one.

Its not about the plane or the pentagon or about the missing secret shit or the yam Its about you being a bot bullshit generator.

We all know what you are. Carry on.

Bullshit, "roach." Take a look at WTC 7 dropping in obvious controlled demolition--and tell me the official story stands up. Do you even know what the official story is for WTC 7? Or who concocted it? Of course you don't. And that's intentional.

As for "witnesses" to the pentagon strike, why were all the security videos--from the pentagon and surrounding buildings--immediately confiscated and permanently sealed? And how the fuck does a 757 supposedly fit into a ten-foot hole and leave no debris?

How do you--or anyone--continue to pretend to believe a word of the official story?

[LTS TRN 2]

Oh yeah who saw a plane hit the pentagon?

Why do you pretend to be so stupid on this subject?

First, you're utterly disgusting. Let's be clear up front.

As for the ludicrous accounts of "witnesses" to a 757 coming in at ground level, this is an example of the power of suggestion. That is, if the account is packaged in a glossy seemingly reputable magazine, people will pretty much believe anything. As for the accounts themselves, they're impossibly idiotic. First, an airliner cannot fly at 530 mph (or even close) at ground level. It would fall apart. Second, it would be so loud as to deafen anyone within a half mile. Third, a whole lot of people would have seen it--not just three. And fourth, if it struck a steel street light pole with its wing it would immediately burst into flames and crash, period. The wings are the fuel tanks, And the entire aircraft is intentionally diffuse in its weight distribution, which means the wings are not protected at all and would succumb to any sort of impact by a steel pole.

The real question is Why would anyone desperately cling to the official story when it's so obviously bullshit? What's your pathetic excuse?

[Left Seater]

if it struck a steel street light pole with its wing it would immediately burst into flames and crash, period.

Thanks for the morning laff.

[Kierland]

Better than your usual morning cry I guess.

[LTS TRN 2]

if it struck a steel street light pole with its wing it would immediately burst into flames and crash, period.

Thanks for the morning laff.

Okay, fake-seater, let's see you provide an example of an airliner striking anything with its wing--let alone (multiple) steel poles--and not burst into flames. C'mon, you total fraud.

[Left Seater]

There are plenty of photos out there where modern airlines are flying with holes in their wings. Most of them from metals much stronger than steel.

Is your google broken or are those all fakes as well.

[Kierland]

Funny how you won’t talk about science. Actually it’s not, you are a fat fucking loser.

[Left Seater]

I laffed. Your google must be broken as well. But keep ankle biting.