Trying to resolve 9/11

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: neutronflux
Is this false:

I said........wiki has resolved 911.

Quote where I ever made such a statement.

And please note the actual cited sources in the oversimplified quoted rundown. So no. The cited paragraphs are a rundown of works outlined on the Wiki page. So wiki is not the actual source.

And it’s a wiki page you are free to submit changes as you see fit. Might make a great thread. Clearly state what changes you would like made, and detail the effort of submitting those requests to wiki.

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: neutronflux
Is this false:

I said........wiki has resolved 911.

Quote where I ever made such a statement.

Quote where I said you did.

originally posted by: Itisnowagain

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: neutronflux
Is this false:

I said........wiki has resolved 911.

Quote where I ever made such a statement.

Quote where I said you did.

Then like most post of yours. Of topic and useless.

a reply to: neutronflux

What does the expected sounds of a building fire have to do with:

7 Major booms, seconds before collapse(initiation). I do not see this audio/video evidence sourced or discussed upon on -any- wikipedia article.

originally posted by: democracydemo
a reply to: neutronflux

What does the expected sounds of a building fire have to do with:

7 Major booms, seconds before collapse(initiation). I do not see this audio/video evidence sourced or discussed upon on -any- wikipedia article.

There are booms expected from an office / building fire. They do no have the energy / frequency/ decibel level / seismic register of an explosion with the force and resultant pressure wave that could cut steel columns.

Good thread you might want to read through...

Audio Reference for Falling or Burning Things that Sound Like Explosions

www.metabunk.org...

One of the common claims of proponents of the the 9/11 "controlled demolition" conspiracy theory is that people hear "explosion-like" sounds, and hence the buildings must have been demolished by explosives.

Besides the rather obvious lack of any recording of things that sound like normal controlled demolition, the main objection to this theory is that "explosion-like" sounds were entirely to be expected on that day. These would be in categories

The initial plane impacts and subsequent fuel/air explosions
Things falling and impacting the ground or other buildings
Things heating up and exploding
Structure members failing
The actual collapses, multiple things falling, overpressure blowing out windows
So I thought it would be useful to gather a collection of audio samples of these type of things, so they can be compared against the accounts of people who were there, and any possible noises caught on tape. #2 (falling things) and #3 (heating things exploding) would probably be the most useful, as on 9/11 they occurred after the impact, and before the collapses - presumably when the alternative theorists are suggesting the building was being "demolished"

Youtube is probably a good source of these. Please add the timecode to the link if the noises are not within a few seconds of the start.

Some examples:

Thread has examples....

a reply to: democracydemo

7 Major booms, seconds before collapse(initiation). I do not see this audio/video evidence sourced or discussed upon on -any- wikipedia article.

You won't, like much of today's fake news media. With 9/11 a state sponsored act a lot of resources and support has gone into backing the official story. People like neuron flux show just how committed some are to this version of events, they seam to live quite comfortably with all the holes in the official version and eagerly accept any excuse to hold their views.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

How do you know it was hit by real planes

What caused the outside inward damage. The fire ball equivalent of 10,000 gallons of jet fuel. There wasn’t explosives strapped to the ousted of the building and not 180 fifty five gallon drums full of jet fuel to simulate the fire ball. The damage was too large for a non exploding missile used as a kinetic weapon. The damage inconsistent for a explosion middle or missiles. Jet wrecked found in the street after the impacts. Recovered jet wreckage. Multiple people saw and attest to jets hitting the twin towers. The jet Impact videos from multiple angles. The sound heard / in the videos. Passenger / crew / hijacker DNA-remains recovered from WTC pile. Families had people aboard flight 11 and 175 that did not return home.

One should question. Only the biased or total idiots conclude jets did not hit the twin towers.

They were imploded, from inside the structures. That's why CD's are called implosions, of course. It's an internal demolition.

No plane debris was found there, in any way. To claim they found passports of the 'hijackers' is absurd, and totally ridiculous!

If they were real planes, people would have seen and heard them miles out, not the moment before supposedly 'hitting' the towers! Think about it. How would two large commercial planes go completely unnoticed, unseen, unheard, for miles and miles above one of the most populated cities in the world, if they were real planes? Not a chance!

Planes are heard well before we even SEE them, fly overhead. Planes don't fly near NYC, so if one DID fly by, it would be seen by everyone, filmed by everyone, photographed by everyone - long BEFORE it was ever NEAR to Manhattan!

It wasn't, at all. This shows the planes were NOT real, merely images of planes.

For me, the best evidence they were not real planes is the videos. Going over the videos, frame by frame, shows the plane 'sink' into the tower, leave no damage, no hole, as if it was a 'phantom' plane, a 'ghost' plane, which cannot happen, if it was a real plane!

Once again, something they have claimed - cannot be replicated with real models. Because it's faked, a ruse, a cartoon - so they ignore it, as if doesn't exist, or matter.


You think these were real planes, because of some people claiming to hear and/or see them, flying above them, and hitting the buildings. But they didn't see or hear planes until a few seconds, at MOST, before they 'hit' the towers!

If you don't know what's odd about that, it's obvious to anyone living near international airports, have flights above them, at such altitudes, as on 9/11, etc.

I don't know if you live near an airport, or whatever, but I do, and I can tell you - as absolute fact - that any plane flying at such altitudes will ALWAYS be heard, by everyone around, BEFORE we ever can SEE them, since sound travels out, before the object creating that sound appears.

When were these (so-called) 'planes' first heard? Look at the videos, which show the plane above, before impact. How long do you hear the plane, before they show it above them?

It isn't heard until a moment before it's seen/filmed above them, right? NO sound of a plane is even heard in some videos! How can that happen? These films have audio, any sound of a plane, would be heard, well before they'd see it, let alone WHERE they see it - almost directly above them!

Planes are very loud, noticeably so, at such altitudes, BEFORE they first appear, and BEFORE they fly above us, closest point to us, etc.

How can you explain the lack of sound, before the plane was first seen/filmed?

a reply to: turbonium1

They were imploded, from inside the structures. That's why CD's are called implosions, of course. It's an internal demolition.

But the twin towers were not imploded.







The floor system was sheared from a still standing core, then the core columns tumbled outward from loss of lateral support.

You

No plane debris was found there, in any way. To claim they found passports of the 'hijackers' is absurd, and totally ridiculous!

Blatant lie by you.

Explaining the 9/11 Murray St Engine from Flight 175 (N612UA) that hit WTC2

www.metabunk.org...

When United Flight 175 hit World Trade Center Tower 2 on 9/11 some large parts of it passed through the building and landed in the streets to the north. One of these was a badly damaged core part of an engine. This landed at the intersection of Murray st and Church St.

More parts here

9/11 Aircraft Parts and Contents Recovered in NYC
sites.google.com...

"I'm on West Street, right out of the Brooklyn Battery Tunnel. And I was driving in, and I heard an enormous explosion. Then I heard another enormous explosion, and it scared me. I looked out the window, and an enormous tire, what appeared to be a tire, smashed down on the street in front of me. And I looked out, and there was an enormous amount of debris, and we were two or three or four blocks down from the World Trade Center. This is the northern building in the World Trade Center. I yelled to the gentleman in the car, 'Let me out.' I ran back, and a gentleman next to me had been hit by debris." George Shea, live on the telephone with NY1 news

If they were real planes, people would have seen and heard them miles out, not the moment before supposedly 'hitting' the towers! Think about it. How would two large commercial planes go completely unnoticed, unseen, unheard, for miles and miles above one of the most populated cities in the world, if they were real planes? Not a chance!

You mean like the first jet traveling at high speed heard for several seconds before hitting the first tower.

Naudet brothers 9/11 Documentary - 1st plane hits North Tower

m.youtube.com...

A jet traveling at 400 mph will travel 6.6 miles in a minute.

A jet traveling at 50 mph will travel 8.4 miles in a minute.


You

For me, the best evidence they were not real planes is the videos. Going over the videos, frame by frame, shows the plane 'sink' into the tower, leave no damage, no hole, as if it was a 'phantom' plane, a 'ghost' plane, which cannot happen, if it was a real plane!

No. I know they are really jets that hit the towers because... again...

What caused the outside inward damage. The fire ball equivalent of 10,000 gallons of jet fuel. There wasn’t explosives strapped to the ousted of the building and not 180 fifty five gallon drums full of jet fuel to simulate the fire ball. The damage was too large for a non exploding missile used as a kinetic weapon. The damage inconsistent for a explosion middle or missiles. Jet wrecked found in the street after the impacts. Recovered jet wreckage. Multiple people saw and attest to jets hitting the twin towers. The jet Impact videos from multiple angles. The sound heard / in the videos. Passenger / crew / hijacker DNA-remains recovered from WTC pile. Families had people aboard flight 11 and 175 that did not return home.

One should question. Only the biased or total idiots conclude jets did not hit the twin towers.

a reply to: turbonium1

Your only arguments are truth movement lies.

a reply to: turbonium1

You

To claim they found passports of the 'hijackers' is absurd, and totally ridiculous!

Since WTC jet wreckage passed through at least one tower and ended up in the street, It would actually have been abnormal not to find any personal affects.

Looters Stole Cash, Credit Cards, and Jewelry from Flight MH17 Crash Victims
Locals and armed separatist raided the scene before the investigators could even get to the suitcases.

www.theatlantic.com...

Mont Blanc melting glacier yields Indian newspapers from 1966 plane crash
Receding French ice leaves behind newspapers proclaiming Indira Gandhi’s rise to become PM
Peter Beaumont
Mon 13 Jul 2020 11.15 EDT

www.theguardian.com...

Copies of Indian newspapers onboard an Air India jet that crashed into Mont Blanc in the 1960s have been revealed by melting ice on the mountain’s Bossons glacier

The papers, with headlines from when Indira Gandhi became India’s prime minister, were discovered by Timothée Mottin, who runs a cafe-restaurant, La Cabane du Cerro, at an altitude of 1,350 metres (4,455ft) above the French resort of Chamonix.

Air India flight 101 flew into the Europe’s highest mountain at 8am on 24 January 1966 after a verbal flight control miscommunication, leading to the loss of all 177 passengers and crew, although conspiracy theorists have offered other more lurid explanations.

“They are drying now but they are in very good condition,” Mottin, 33, said of the newspaper. “You can read them.”

a reply to: turbonium1

18 Views of 'Plane Impact' in South Tower | 9/11 World Trade Center [HD DOWNLOAD]


The no plane theory is just one part of the psychological war going on around 9/11. Helps keep the matter confused. The pilots for 9/11 truth done a lot of good work trying to sort out some of the facts from the fiction.

What I gathered from a lot of their work, the planes that had the passengers had their radar signature transferred to some military drones while they where flying around mid air for about an hour. It was the military drones that hit the towers with a C130 in the area directing operations. There was no way they could trust some inexperienced pilots to hit the right target.

The planes with the passengers did land at some nearby airports. Those in the plane where either in on the operation and got new identities or executed.

There where some reports that the black boxes from the drones where recovered in the clean up, but got quickly censored like many other things. The video footage from buildings around the pentagon is just one example of this censorship.

For those that have been on this since the start, there is a lot of evidence and witnesses that planes did hit the towers. With all the censorship over the years and for those new to the topic, I can understand some people at least looking at these theories. I have in the past, it does not add up.

a reply to: kwakakev

You

The no plane theory is just one part of the psychological war going on around 9/11.

There is no psychological war. Its con artists pushing a marketable lie to a target audience of idiots willIng to donate and or shared as liked on social media.

a reply to: kwakakev

You

What I gathered from a lot of their work, the planes that had the passengers had their radar signature transferred to some military drones while they where flying around mid air for about an hour.

WTF.

How do you transfer a “radar signature”. Do you even understand how Radar works. The radar transmits a signal that travels through the air, bounces off items in the air, then the bounced radar signal returns to the radar tower. There is no radar signature to transfer because what ever is in the air is going to bounce the radar wave back to the radar tower.


Then you have the actual jet wreckage at the WTC. Then you have the recovered crew and passenger remains and DNA.

a reply to: neutronflux

There is no psychological war.

Then why are we in disagreement over one of the greatest crimes ever performed? Why is the matter still clouded in controversy? Why is so much information about this criminal act still wrapped up in state secrets and deemed a threat to national security if these details where to be released?

Why are you fighting so hard to defend the official story? Looks like a psychological war to me.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

You

Look at the videos when the plane first contacts the tower, frame by frame, as it goes into the building, until if finally disappears.

If true. Post screen shot of video. Cite and link to which video, which angle. The video compression, and frame rate.

And the frame rate is what? 24 frames per second. How far can an object traveling 500 miles an hour go on 1/24 of a second. The video is going to miss at least 10 feet of travel between frames. Then you have low resolution video at what, 480 dpi. Of video compressed how many times as it travels the internet.

These would be the same videos you always claimed to be 'evidence' it was not a CD, right? The videos you've kept bleating about, which show the moment of initial collapse, at certain point(s), thus proving it was not a CD?

But now, you claim the videos are too slow, to capture one, specific moment, since that moment destroys your whole argument, if it's accepted as true.


When we have videos of what appears - at first glance - to be a real airplane, we have conclusive evidence, which clearly shows it was a fake. Beyond a doubt.

The fact that it would be heard, for miles around, BEFORE it was ever seen. Real planes are always heard well before being seen, let alone seen almost directly overhead! It's absurd.

They don't slice through buildings, either.

Nobody can prove this is even possible, because it's completely absurd.

a reply to: neutronflux

How do you transfer a “radar signature”

I have already posted some of the work by pilots for 9/11 truth. You want to ignore it that is your call.

a reply to: kwakakev

You

Then why are we in disagreement over one of the greatest crimes ever performed?

Because con artist that can make a living and gain fame from pushing lies like flight 175 and flight 11 did not hit the towers to people that wouldn’t no truth from a whole in the ground.

originally posted by: kwakakev
a reply to: neutronflux

How do you transfer a “radar signature”

I have already posted some of the work by pilots for 9/11 truth. You want to ignore it that is your call.

No. You posted lies based on pseudoscience.

Again..

WTF.

How do you transfer a “radar signature”. Do you even understand how Radar works. The radar transmits a signal that travels through the air, bounces off items in the air, then the bounced radar signal returns to the radar tower. There is no radar signature to transfer because what ever is in the air is going to bounce the radar wave back to the radar tower.


Then you have the actual jet wreckage at the WTC. Then you have the recovered crew and passenger remains and DNA.

a reply to: turbonium1

Get it together Turbo. Your having a high speed come apart.

You

These would be the same videos you always claimed to be 'evidence' it was not a CD, right?

You referring to the actual video that shows the core columns still standing whole seconds after the floor system shears away.

Like these?









Stills from video that shows a stationary core that is still
standing then gains velocity to tumble outward.

Your trying to compare video and stills of a structural member standing at standstill for whole seconds then accelerates as it tumbled from loss of lateral support vs a jet already traveling over 400 miles per hour (586 feet per second) as it plows into a building?

Really?

You

When we have videos of what appears - at first glance - to be a real airplane, we have conclusive evidence, which clearly shows it was a fake. Beyond a doubt.

No.

We have you lying about no jet wreckage. With no possible way explosives and 10,000 gallons of jet fuel were staged on the outside of the twin towers to simulate a jet going from the outside of the buildings inward. With loved ones missing the people that were on flights 175 and 11. With the passager and crew remains and DNA recovered at the WTC. With radar tracking the jets from takeoff to the WTC.

a reply to: turbonium1

And you missed. Your referring to crapy 2001 low resolution video that is floating around on the Internet with no reference how much it has been compressed over the years losing resolution and detail.