911 flatline - more evidence for no planes

[Bryan]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HW8fIMwGQgs

(4 parts)

In part 2 a retired aerospace engineer says you'd have to be stupid to believe planes went into the buildings.

[chek]

..and not very convincingly either.

Once you get over the semantic and subconscious hangup of viewing the twin towers to be 'buildings' in the conventional sense (bricks and mortar style solidity) and instead consider the outer facades of the WTC as an eggslicer consisting of thin, foot wide hollow steel bars with glass filled empty space between them (a simplification, I know), it all becomes much easier to visualise.

One of the most misleading things about the lo-res videos favoured by no plane exponents, is that the lack of definition reinforces the mistaken idea that the Towers had solid walls.

[Micpsi]

Precisely, Chek. No one who has seen the photo of the Twin Towers with the setting sun shining straight through their windows from one side to its other can fail to understand how a plane flying at 400-500mph would enter it instead of bouncing off its walls, as the no-planers claim. A large percentage of the facade of each tower was just a large network of easily impenetrable, glass windows. NOT steel-reinforced, concrete walls.

[gruts]

more "evidence" for no planes or just another compilation of the same old * we've seen before?

it seems to consist of the usual wrong assumptions and misconceptions that we've come to expect from npt advocates, the usual empty speculation based on low res compressed footage with an unknown chain of custody, the usual pictures of cars and planes crashing set to music, the usual highly selective sequence of edited statements by witnesses who didn't see the planes, the usual namecalling aimed at those of us who don't believe in npt....and of course...."THEY IGNORE NO PLANES SO IT MUST BE TRUE"!!!!!

there's a puzzling moment towards the end of part 3 when, after several minutes of repetitive claims that the planes couldn't possibly have penetrated the outer frame of the wtc, we see the familiar clip of Frank de Martini (wtc construction and project manager) talking about how a plane would penetrate the external frame of the wtc like a pencil puncturing screen netting.

I was mildly disappointed by the fact that "the mysterious moving bridge that proves tv fakery" wasn't mentioned, but maybe it'll appear in part 5....

[jfk]

good film

[Dogsmilk]

[chek]

Come now Dogsmilk and Micpsi this is obviously a pre-arranged, private moment we have ungraciously intruded upon.

I only hope we can get out of the door before they start doing whatever sock-puppets do when they're alone together.

[Dogsmilk]

I wouldn't worry about intruding on any beautiful moments, Chek. It's all go in the exciting world of The Researchers tm. Why, I see Prole Art Easy Rider is preparing a new outfit as we speak.

[chek]

Oh tish now.

I've come to expect such worldliness from Gruts, but you - you have your whole life ahead of you!

Now away with you and let us allow The Researchers tm their stolen moment of passion together.

[rooney gr8]

i thought that plane in the background which seemed to be just flying past was intriguing to say the least, it did look remarkably like that american airlines plane..

also whould the engines and landing gear of both planes hit in between the floor section of the towers? as there would have been incredible strength in these area's..

[chek]