You surely don't believe an airplane crashes into a building like the video shows? Melts into the bldg.?
So you're saying "the science is settled, we have a consensus"? That's not very skeptical or scientific of you. You want there to be no planes involved because that supports your preferred bias and theories. That does not make for truth. We have to question everything with 9/11 because the real truth is complex and obfuscated to hell. Don't let your passion cloud you skeptical judgment. Explore every angle because after all, if you believe DEWs and Tesla weapons are plausible explanations, then airplanes and explosives are as well.
Fair enough. But I was simply stating the obvious about one particular plane video, planes crumble, they don't do cartoon cutouts.
Maybe somebody has an explanation (though I've heard some of them no doubt, "the speed of the plane" etc.)
planes crumble, they don't do cartoon cutouts.
Bullets crumble and deform too yet they make nice 'cartoon-cutout' holes. Mass, velocity, inertia and momentum matter in physics. As I said earlier, the truth is complicated because the physics and countless variables involved don't make for a nice, simple explanation. Everyone wants a simple answer but that's just not possible.
Yeah, I'm open to whatever the truth is. About anything.
I do try to follow the maxim "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."
One of the first things that bothered me was several pilots saying that the govt. posted speeds of planes, that close to ground-level, they would have broken apart.
Etc. One of these days, hopefully...
(post is archived)