Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

What caused the damage to columns 145 through 152?

page: 4
8
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 7 2011 @ 03:35 PM
link   
reply to post by septic
 



....this is an offer to the community to put our heads together to discuss the available evidence.

You first - what about all those good folks that saw the plane hit the building?




posted on Nov, 7 2011 @ 03:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by septic
 



....this is an offer to the community to put our heads together to discuss the available evidence.

You first - what about all those good folks that saw the plane hit the building?


What does this have to do with the left-right damage?



posted on Nov, 7 2011 @ 03:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by septic
 


And we add yet another layer to the conspiracy. The people who program the missiles, the people that fire them.....and finally, the bean counters that inventory them. And now it's a dozen of them being used?


Throw in every New Yorker that was there that day and isn't mentioning seeing a dozen missiles.....
edit on 7-11-2011 by vipertech0596 because: (no reason given)


What are you saying?

Are you saying that the impossible is possible when the conspiracy reaches a certain size?



posted on Nov, 7 2011 @ 03:42 PM
link   
reply to post by septic
 


Maybe the jet impacts caused the damage? Wild guess.



posted on Nov, 7 2011 @ 03:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by DrEugeneFixer
reply to post by septic
 


Maybe the jet impacts caused the damage? Wild guess.


For the incurious, this might suffice.



posted on Nov, 7 2011 @ 03:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by septic

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by septic
 



....this is an offer to the community to put our heads together to discuss the available evidence.

You first - what about all those good folks that saw the plane hit the building?


What does this have to do with the left-right damage?


The "left-right" is your abstract opinion. The eyewitnesses to the plane crash are not abstract, and they are not opinions. You must deal with them first.



posted on Nov, 7 2011 @ 03:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper

Originally posted by septic

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by septic
 



....this is an offer to the community to put our heads together to discuss the available evidence.

You first - what about all those good folks that saw the plane hit the building?


What does this have to do with the left-right damage?


The "left-right" is your abstract opinion. The eyewitnesses to the plane crash are not abstract, and they are not opinions. You must deal with them first.


Eyewitnesses are notoriously unreliable; additionally if the government were responsible, they'd have a cover story in place. What did you think trillions of dollars in black-op funding goes for? They're not only reserved for scripted foreign revolutions.

It is not my abstract opinion. The logic is sound; based on the visible evidence, the dents in columns 145-152 prove a projectile struck the columns in a left-to-right motion.




posted on Nov, 7 2011 @ 03:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by septic

Originally posted by DrEugeneFixer
reply to post by septic
 


Maybe the jet impacts caused the damage? Wild guess.


For the incurious, this might suffice.


Or for those who are willing to follow evidence instead of speculation. Sure, the purpose of this board is speculation, but what are you driving at? Your whole line of reasoning is to assume your favored conclusion, and then work backwards from there, tossing out all evidence that contradicts it. Do you know how this looks to normal people? You must be one of those paid disinfo characters that the truthers complain are ruining the movement.



posted on Nov, 7 2011 @ 04:00 PM
link   
reply to post by DrEugeneFixer
 





Or for those who are willing to follow evidence instead of speculation.


Good idea. What does the evidence of the dents suggest to you?



posted on Nov, 7 2011 @ 04:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper

The "left-right" is your abstract opinion. The eyewitnesses to the plane crash are not abstract, and they are not opinions. You must deal with them first.

So Bigfoot and the Lockness Monster are real???



posted on Nov, 7 2011 @ 04:05 PM
link   
reply to post by septic
 



Eyewitnesses are notoriously unreliable

That's convenient nonsense. Since when? Now if you are going to rely on the witness to tell you how fast the plane was going - OK. But not about whether or not a plane existed. Like baseball - 10 people see the pitch, 6 think its a strike and four think its a ball but none say the pitcher didn't throw anything.

additionally if the government were responsible, they'd have a cover story in place. What did you think trillions of dollars in black-op funding goes for?

Fulfilling your fantasies? Seriously, how do you "black op" hundreds if not thousands of persons into thinking they saw a plane, and don't forget, I personally know at least three of them.

They're not only reserved for scripted foreign revolutions.

Huh?

It is not my abstract opinion.

Sorry, but its only your abstract view of the damage.

The logic is sound; based on the visible evidence, the dents in columns 145-152 prove a projectile struck the columns in a left-to-right motion.

No, they really don't.
g.



posted on Nov, 7 2011 @ 04:12 PM
link   
reply to post by hooper
 





how do you "black op" hundreds if not thousands of persons into thinking they saw a plane,


Evidently by staging a fake terrorist attack using all the tools available within academia, business, government, media and military.



and don't forget, I personally know at least three of them.


And don't forget, I personally don't believe that for a second.



posted on Nov, 7 2011 @ 04:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by septic


It is not my abstract opinion. The logic is sound; based on the visible evidence, the dents in columns 145-152 prove a projectile struck the columns in a left-to-right motion.



The logic is sound; except for the dents that are bent in a right to left motion.

That makes it septic logic.



posted on Nov, 7 2011 @ 04:16 PM
link   
reply to post by waypastvne
 






The logic is sound; except for the dents that are bent in a right to left motion.



please explain



posted on Nov, 7 2011 @ 04:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by septic
reply to post by waypastvne
 






The logic is sound; except for the dents that are bent in a right to left motion.



please explain





posted on Nov, 7 2011 @ 07:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by septic

It is not my abstract opinion. The logic is sound; based on the visible evidence, the dents in columns 145-152 prove a projectile struck the columns in a left-to-right motion.



This is what happens when you focus on one relatively small aspect of the physical evidence (in this case about four columns) and completely ignore the bigger picture. You get this:



. . . as an explanation for this:



Sound logic indeed.



posted on Nov, 7 2011 @ 07:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by ATH911

Originally posted by hooper

The "left-right" is your abstract opinion. The eyewitnesses to the plane crash are not abstract, and they are not opinions. You must deal with them first.

So Bigfoot and the Lockness Monster are real???


I don't think so, but I am willing to deal with the "witnesses" to those things. The poster just wants to call them all liars. I don't think the witnesses (as few as there are) are lying, I just think they saw something other than bigfoot and the loch ness monster.



posted on Nov, 7 2011 @ 08:30 PM
link   
reply to post by waypastvne
 


You're jumping at shadows. The damage is clearly left-to right; visible from multiple angles.



Besides, I was hoping for something other than a couple arrows. You're usually not at such a loss for words. Surely the comparison of a spear hitting a tree sideways doesn't damper your zeal for the impossible?



posted on Nov, 7 2011 @ 08:33 PM
link   
reply to post by septic
 


There also no visible plane debris where a plane supposedly smashed through. On either tower.



posted on Nov, 7 2011 @ 08:35 PM
link   
reply to post by lunarasparagus
 


This is the 911 version of fitting a square peg in a round hole.

The TV does not trump physics. The wings would not have severed columns like that, and certainly wouldn't have bent them on the wrong sides. Few projectiles can explain it better than missiles, and a 767 ain't one of them.





new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join