It's irrelevant is if it did or did not.
Which point are you referring to? What is "it"?
The entire point of my commentary is to highlight that such videos can ONLY destroy credibility of those attempting to present other information. It can serve no other purpose. The simple math is to highlight why this is the case.
This video won't persuade anybody, it simply shows two similar situations with totally different results. Old plane crashes into old building vs new plane crashes into new building ... with dramatically different results. The inquisitive reader might be inclined to research this further.
The difference in energy is like that of a bullet versus explosion. Vast difference. As such, not comparable in the least.
The energy "bullet vs explosion" doesn't matter. The Empire State Building and the twin towers all remained standing long after impact. The south tower collapse occurred at least 56 minutes after impact, north tower much longer.
What is "it"?
It being the cause of the collapse. The impact of this aircraft has no bearing. Different aircraft. Different mass. Different structure & distribution. Different metals ("steel" is not "steel"). Different velocities. Different fuel volumes. Different fuels.
The energy "bullet vs explosion" doesn't matter. The Empire State Building and the twin towers all remained standing long after impact. The south tower collapse occurred at least 56 minutes after impact, north tower much longer.
You're allowing yourself to fall into a trap. You say "doesn't matter" on a post which literally doesn't matter. THAT'S THE POINT!!! At no point did I claim every other fact in the universe doesn't apply. The purpose of spelling this out is because people like you are mentally trapped. Posts like OP literally have ZERO bearing on the issue; regardless of your take on 9/11. The ONLY possible outcome of such posts is they destroy your credibility. So if you want to push alternative explanations, you can't, because you just kicked your own legs out from under yourself.
Anyone claiming stupid shit like, "an airplane once did a thing, therefore all airplanes and things are exactly the same", are, well, idiots. They will be called out as such. The result is you will be attacked and destroyed, even if providing factually accurate information. REGARDLESS OF YOUR POSITION. Period. THIS IS ENTIRELY THE PURPOSE OF THIS TYPE OF PROPAGANDA. IT'S SO YOU DESTROY YOUR OWN CREDIBILITY, THEREFORE NO ONE WILL LISTEN TO YOU.
For the purpose of this discussion, it is 100% irrelevant if the collision caused it or a stampede of elephants parachuting in caused it. If you destroy your own credibility, nothing else you wish to contribute matters. This ultimately means you only harm the truth. Period.
This entire thread is about the psychology of events and not the event itself. As you continue to focus on the event and not the psychology, you only confirm you are mentally trapped. My purpose in explaining all this is to get you out of this mental trap. Which means you are then empowered to present your case, whatever it may be.
Whatever Dude. I don't have time for your pretzel logic.
lol. When your view of reality is called, "pretzel logic", you now understand why I'm trying to help you.
Whoosh.
Just to bring this home, here's the ONLY valid response to my comments.
You're right. This content has no bearing on the subject. We should ignore it. But let me tell you what I believe are factors....
This way you're not trapped nor entangled with the propaganda.
Or,
You're right.
I posted this in because I didn't know the Empire State Building had been hit by a plane long ago. I never mentioned the twin towers in my post, that came with these ensuing comments, which opened up 9-11 discussion and debate. I don't believe the official narrative wrt the WTC. Too many details don't add up.
This specific case is often used to launch 9/11 discussions. You'll find it a common part of past discussion even here.
(post is archived)