Plane impact caused street light to fail for a second?!?

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
1st off ... What the are objects that were recorded by amature, and all major newscasts, and seen by thousands of New Yorkers, that is slamming into the sides of the buildings?

They are cartoons. CGI. Graphics. Major newscast footage was used live to some extent, although im sure there was a small delay whilst overlaying footage, an intensive process for computers. Some people did not see or hear any plane. Niether did two newsrorters, one seeing raw footage (no-plane), and the other on the ground in NY.

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
2nd.... What type of explosive were used to make the jet shaped holes on the side of the towers?

Cutter charges. If you look at the closeups of the hole, several steel box columns look like they've been exploded from the inside.

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
3rd.... IF you claim there isn't jet fuel, how can you explain the vast majorty of survivors that either saw or smelled kerosene? In addition, how do you discount the countless firefighters that SAW jew fuel on fire at the base of the elevator pits?

The big explosion could have been planted kerosene. If we say there is no plane, then it would make sense that they had to recreate the damage realisticaly to some extent. As for the elevator pits, that could have been caused by basement explosions, for which there has been significant evidence for a long time, but no one has put it all together, yet.

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
dont say to weaken the core, because the core was standing briefly following the global collapse.

Only a small part of it. Which just reinforces the idea that you'd have to weaken it beforehand.

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
dont say to weaken the core, because the core was standing briefly following the global collapse.

Only a small part of it. Which just reinforces the idea that you'd have to weaken it beforehand.

Can you define small? In one of the videos I watched it was a very large portion.

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
Can you define small? In one of the videos I watched it was a very large portion.

There were 47 or so steel core columns.




It's hard to get a definite count but I see only 7 columns there. That's about 15% of the total, and I consider that a "small" amount.

Originally posted by bsbray11
Gordon Ross and Craig Furlong have a paper out contending that the major seismic events around the times of the impacts were off from the actual impacts by several seconds. This corroborates witness testimonies from the basement, and also fits in with police and FBI reports that a van packed with explosives had been detonated underground in the parking garage around the same time as the impacts.

You can read it here: www.studyof911.com...

Which, included with this evidence, should be enough for people to scratch their heads.

Who Signed Sakher Hammad's
WTC Basement Level Pass?

www.whatreallyhappened.com...

Notice he was arrested in a white moving van. The five dancing Israelis were in a white moving van. I don't think these things are mere coincidence folks.

Anyway, that was definately a derail. Back to the thread.

You actually believe there was no planes? People saw them with their own eyes yet you still think they were CGI. There is no hope for you my friend. I just hope that when you meet someone who was there that day, they don't punch you in the face.

Originally posted by shrunkensimon
Watch the shop to the left/behind the man. All the lighting on this shop turns off for a split second, then comes back on. Now im a little nervous, because im not sure what to make of this. Can a jetfuel fireball cause an EMP to affect street lighting some distance away, or any explosion for that matter??

Would be interesting to find out if this happened at the same moment that everybody loss their cell phones and radio communications.
An EMP from a micronuclear demolitions device?
The Special Atomic Demolition Munition (SADM)
Would explain molten steel remaining molten hot for weeks upon weeks in a rubble pile.

I have no doubts that microfusion weapons were used during the demolition procedure. But im not so sure if thats what caused this lighting glitch.. i don't think the plane impact explosion was a mininuke, although it could well have been (i don't know what one going off looks like). I think there is a possiblity that another bomb was going off somewhere else in the WTC at the time of the plane impact.

I don know, its very perplexing this glitch!

Okay, wow, where to begin....

1) Ask 20 random people on the street what the exact time is record their answer and compare it to your watch.

2) A large clap of thunder can mean I am without power for hours. Car hits a telephone pole, out for hours. Heavy thunderstorm, I may never lose power or it could be an hour later or more. Usually I will see the lights dim or grow bright before it happens. Sometimes not.

3) I most certainly hope that no one is rabidly shouting TV Fakery in public, involuntary commitment laws are only somewhat off the books. But if you placed into a 72 observation, keep the previous sentance in mind.

4) If a plane hits a building and no one was able to video it, does that mean it did not happen?

Originally posted by shrunkensimon
They are cartoons. CGI. Graphics. Major newscast footage was used live to some extent, although im sure there was a small delay whilst overlaying footage, an intensive process for computers. Some people did not see or hear any plane. Niether did two newsrorters, one seeing raw footage (no-plane), and the other on the ground in NY.

What about all the amateure videos? There are hundreds of them! What about the THOUSANDS of eyewitnesses???

Originally posted by shrunkensimon
Cutter charges. If you look at the closeups of the hole, several steel box columns look like they've been exploded from the inside.

Ok...so these cuttercharges were placed then around some sirt of a template to "carve out" the shape of an airplane...and these charges all went off to coinside with the cartoon airplane?

Originally posted by shrunkensimon

The big explosion could have been planted kerosene. If we say there is no plane, then it would make sense that they had to recreate the damage realisticaly to some extent. As for the elevator pits, that could have been caused by basement explosions, for which there has been significant evidence for a long time, but no one has put it all together, yet.

Please explain to me where they are going to store 28 THOUSAND gallons of Kerosene??
This is a 55 gallon drum:



you would need to store about 510 together, of these to add up to the estimated 28K gallons that were in the plane.

would be kind of hard to hide this with the amount of maintenance worjers there are .








[edit on 19-6-2007 by CaptainObvious]

Originally posted by Ahabstar
1) Ask 20 random people on the street what the exact time is record their answer and compare it to your watch.

LDEO seismic timestamps, FAA timestamps, the mainstream media, etc., are all synced up to the second, at least. There should be no variation. In fact, NIST is the agency that is responsible for keeping the most accurate clock in the nation and has a radio frequency reserved specifically for broadcasting very accurate time readings.

Shrunken, just a question on your theory. Your saying that the people behind this event (al queada, The Government, Skull & bones, Reptillians, whomever) faked all major news networks footage with CGI planes, live as they were being aired, took the time to make cut out holes of the buildings with prop explosions to make it look like a plane hit, confiscated all the amateur footage out there and superimposed the cgi planes, etc.

Wouldn't it be easier, more cost effective, and less risky, to just hire somebody to slam into the buildings with a plane? Hire some muslim terrorists to attack us, make them think its a holy war thing (using our great CIA undercover agents to instigate it.) And just let them slam planes into the buildings?

I mean, Ockhams razor, the most likely scenerio is the most simplistic. And it would just seem easier, cheaper, and less risky to hell, just slam planes into buildings.

Originally posted by WolfofWar
I mean, Ockhams razor, the most likely scenerio is the most simplistic. And it would just seem easier, cheaper, and less risky to hell, just slam planes into buildings.

Would you please think before posting. What could be more simple than NOT using planes. No pilots needed. No hijackings needed. No FAA involvement. No NORAD standdown.

No physical evidence leading to the conspirators. No risk of something not going to plan ie hijackers deciding to hit another target.

No one in the truth movement has ever explained how the 4 planes managed to go unchallenged through the most secure airspace in the world without being shot down. No one has managed to substantiate planes at the Pentagon or Shanksville.. not in photographical evidence, nor physical such as bodies or blood. No Pentagon CCTV showing the moment of impact... why? Because there never was.

Man, I was following you on the EMP thing until you said there were no planes. I'm all about figuring out whether this was an inside job or not but there were planes. You are making the rest of us look like fools with that talk.

Remember that other plane that hit the second tower? Everyone was watching the first building burn when it hit. They visually saw the second plane. Listen to people shriek as the plane approches the second building before it hits it.

The furthest the 'conspiracy theory' really should be taken is whether there were demolition charges in any of the buildings and who the terrorists really were and who they were hired by. I can even go along with switching planes out and using remote/GPS guided ones but there were planes.

PS

Don't call CaptainObvious an idiot, I give him a hard enough time as it is and he helps promote providing evidence from all sides.

I believe the reason for the light flicker was quite simple. The "impact/explosion" created a reverse surge in the electrical grid. Thus causing the flash. System overload. look it up it happens.

Originally posted by Spoodily
Man, I was following you on the EMP thing until you said there were no planes. I'm all about figuring out whether this was an inside job or not but there were planes. You are making the rest of us look like fools with that talk.

No, there weren't. I am not making anyone look like a fool. Everyone who believes planes were used do that all on their own, because they never explain how 4 planes (two of which disappeared into a handful of pieces) could penetrate American airspace, especially given the prewarnings of 9/11. Don't say there wasn't any warning, because there was.

Originally posted by Spoodily
They visually saw the second plane. Listen to people shriek as the plane approches the second building before it hits it.

I have not heard anyone shriek before the plane hits. But i have seen video of people who don't look like they are hearing an incoming plane, and also one of a NEWS REPORTER who said he saw/heard no plane, that the building "just exploded", and corresponding raw news feed being commented on by reporters, who do not mention the plane because there is none on their footage!

There really is nothing to substantiate two planes hitting the buildings other than hearsay and doctored TV footage.

Look at the Pentagon and Shanksville. No planes there, despite what witnesses said.. what does that tell you.


BACK ON TOPIC PLEASE. I will not answer any more questions on the no-planes idea in this thread.

[edit on 19-6-2007 by shrunkensimon]

[edit on 19-6-2007 by shrunkensimon]

i find this thread to be humor more than anything else

[edit on 19-6-2007 by Cosmocow]

and they didn't "penetrate" US airspace, they were alerady in US airspace!!

[edit on 19-6-2007 by Cosmocow]

www.youtube.com...

Watch the shop to the left/behind the man. All the lighting on this shop turns off for a split second, then comes back on. Now im a little nervous, because im not sure what to make of this. Can a jetfuel fireball cause an EMP to affect street lighting some distance away, or any explosion for that matter??

Now my question is, what is causing the street lighting to fail for a split second????

No more questions on no-planes. I have stated my view. U2U me if you want answers if you really care about it that much..

Originally posted by shrunkensimon

Originally posted by WolfofWar
I mean, Ockhams razor, the most likely scenerio is the most simplistic. And it would just seem easier, cheaper, and less risky to hell, just slam planes into buildings.

Would you please think before posting. What could be more simple than NOT using planes. No pilots needed. No hijackings needed. No FAA involvement. No NORAD standdown.

Well, not using planes obviously is the simplistic of all explanations. Untill you involve the UNSIMPLISTIC involvement of having to place cgi planes into live streaming footage without getting caught, taking peoples home videos and also adding cgi planes, Put all those civilians on the payrole to claim that they saw the plane hit, kill off all those civilians that were scheduled to be on the planes that do, or just pay them all off and move them, have them also call up on the phones, put fake blips on the radar to make it LOOK like planes were in the sky,which would involve also paying off FAA officials to look the other way at the either fake blips, or non-existent blips. Also they'd need to make fake black boxes, sneak in the explosives and time them right to make it look like the plane crashed and hit the towers, and fake debris everywhere without people seeing them place it.

So your theory kindof falls apart after the "no plane" aspect. Sure thats easy, but with all the risk of covert agents being caught in media stations, theyre pay offs being tracked down, witness protection people being tracked down, video tampering being shown, FAA officials leaking information, people getting caught planting evidence, the possible failure of synchronized explosives, and the always hard burden of a civilian lieing about something, only to come out and announce they were lieing, I'd say your theory is not only hard to swallow, but for any government agency with the cunning to do all that, the logistic issues and the risk of being caught is just not worth the effort.

It would just be easier to hijack a plane and slam it into a building.

But nice try. You get a gold star for effort, but little else.

Originally posted by shrunkensimon
www.youtube.com...

Watch the shop to the left/behind the man. All the lighting on this shop turns off for a split second, then comes back on. Now im a little nervous, because im not sure what to make of this. Can a jetfuel fireball cause an EMP to affect street lighting some distance away, or any explosion for that matter??

Now my question is, what is causing the street lighting to fail for a split second????

No more questions on no-planes. I have stated my view. U2U me if you want answers if you really care about it that much..

As was already stated, but which you chose to ignore, an EMP would have taken out the camera as well as the light. EMP doesn't discriminate as to what it's going to effect. You're not going to have a light flicker, and nothing happen to a camera.