Originally posted by plube
I am a truther...and i am proud to be one...I have no fear from the negative connotations of the term....but I do not look at things blindly and i do
my own work on issues...so i have done this....and i ask you...does this come close to fitting the pattern....just asking your opinion.
all is done to scale off the plans from the 80th floor...i did not do a complete rendition of the entire building as collapse initiation was above the
I ardently consider 9/11 to be treated as a crime scene...NOT a TERRORIST act.
there is no war on terror...there is only war.
edit on 053131p://f09Monday by plube because: (no reason given)
I'm not sure if your post here was in any way a response to mine though it did appear directly below mine etc.
But in any case I'd like to use your fantastic diagrams if I may. Especially the second one.
I was reading a rant post today that complained that there was a real lack of proof and mostly opinions about things with a nod to the 9/11 forum.
That's my thing lately too. What can we show with some kind of actual evidence? And if it's actual evidence what can be concluded from it?
I will attempt here, using in part your diagrams, to illustrate what I think is actual evidence that anyone can examine and come to a conclusion
about. I hope that everyone interested in 9/11, truth, and actual evidence will all play along.
Your second diagram is great I think (not that the first one isn't) in showing EXACTLY what I've been going on about with my animated avatar pic and
my most recent dozen or so posts. I thank you for posting them.
Now let us all look at it please. Everyone pull up a chair.
You have represented the whole thing brilliantly, see how in the second diagram the fuselage is penetrating the building pretty far, the very start of
the wings are at the building face and the left and right engines both appear to be touching the face of the wall. Your diagram at this point clearly
shows what I have said repeatedly. And that is that the engines on the wings of a 767 are actually ahead of the "wingtips".
This, btw, is shown beautifully in your diagram.
Now considering this (everyone) would you say that it is a FACT based on a 767's design that the engines of the plane would impact the face of the
tower (on a straight nose in approach) BEFORE the respective wing tips would? Yes or No?
Of course it's YES. As the diagram shows.
Now what would everyone say, considering the previous established FACT, if I showed you all a diagram or two of the wing tips hitting the face of the
North Tower and causing damage, BEFORE the engines on those same wings did?
Would you all say and think that was pretty "whacked?"
Of course you would. How would that even look? How would that even be physically possible?
I dare say I'm confident that if I presented you with a diagram that showed the wing tips impacting the tower BEFORE the engines on the very same
wings you all would catch me out on it. You would all say I'm being ridiculous and that it is physically impossible (just as your diagram shows).
Isn't that right? Ok. Good.
So, to recap, if I were to produce and present to you a diagram of Flight 11 impacting the North Tower where the wing tips hit the building before the
engines on the very same wings, on a more or less nose hit straight in trajectory, you'd all tell me to get out of here!! (Lol)
Yeah, well what if instead of a diagram showing the wing tips hitting before the engines I show you A VIDEO!
"Huh? What?! You got a video of something that shows THAT?" You'd all say.
"Yes, Yes I do indeed," I would say.
I contend that the Naudet 'Fireman's Video' shows EXACTLY THAT. The video shows the right "wing tip" impacting the face of the North Tower BEFORE
the right engine on the very same wing!!
And if you all have been following along we all know that's what? That's right - "IMPOSSIBLE!"
So that's what my animated gif avatar pic is about, but if you find that too inadequate and you want to investigate it yourself, head on out to the
web and get the best copy of the Naudet first hit you can find and work through it a frame at a time. If you (anyone) can debunk my assertion based on
the reasoning and evidence I present here in this post I'd be happy to hear it.
The conclusion I draw is it's physically impossible for the right wing gash on the North Tower to have been made by the wing of a 767 aircraft for
the reason that I state. That there is no physical way possible for the right wing tip to impact the face of the North Tower before the right engine,
considering the design of a 767 and the way it went straight in.
Now if the right wing gash wasn't made by the wing of a 767 it's likely that the left side gash wasn't either, and as for all the talk of "jet
fuel" well, let's just leave all that for another post shall we?