posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 09:09 PM
I've watched a couple of attempted debunking videos about the controlled demolition theory. I won't claim to have seen all of them, but I've
noticed that one common characteristic of all the videos or theories that I have seen which accept the government's plane collision scenario, is that
none of them accept or mention eyewitness testimony of explosions immediately prior to the collisions of the planes.
The ones that I've seen, seem to rely almost entirely on hypothetical scenarios, computer generated models, and theoretical extrapolation, rather
than listening to the accounts of actual people who were on the ground at the time, and saw what was going on.
I'd first like to know why you think that is, and secondly, if you know of any theories, videos, or web sites which refute controlled demolition, but
which do include eyewitness testimony in support of said refutation, if you could please provide me with links to such.
I want to try and be open to both sides of this debate, but up until this point, I haven't really seen any "skeptical,"/non-truther scenarios put
forward, that I've felt were as credible. The pancake theory almost was, but I believe that it's true that if it occurred, we still would have had
central beams left, rather than the whole building going down. I also don't personally believe that jet fuel by itself would have been able to cause
that much damage.