And there are many witnesses to the Pentagon that DID see a plane. To refute those witnesses YOU wuld need to provide video evidence, or any evidence, that something other than a plane hit.

Likewise, WTC 7 also shows no outward signs of being "blown up" or destabilised by explosive carges and there is NO audible explosions in the videos of the collapse. So again, neither video looks or sounds like a traditional demo.

which is the official one, and who decided their particular conspiracy theory is the official one

Gage admits this himself becuse he universally snips off the collapse of the penthoise from all video clips of the WTC 7 collapse he presents to cover up the fact there was fatal structural collapse going on at the time of these "explosions".

You are quoting people who were shown that mockery of a documentary from Richard Gage, which was specifically engineered to trick people into thinking WTC 7 was brought down by demolitions.

Well, there goes eyewitness testimony about red and orange flashes, explosions, etc...

right out the window.

And video cuz they can be doctored...

I say let's totally disregard ALL eyewitness testimony and video evidence then and stick to pjysical (sic) evidence, engineering reports and papers, So... whatcha got?

the NIST report estimates these "explosions" were the sounds of the structural failure of the building itself, not any explosives.

www.abovetopsecret.com...
They say things like, "there was A loud explosion" or "I heard a few explosions" Not: I saw dozens of flashes running up the building, accompanied by dozens of explosions, then the building seemed to sinking into the ground.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Okay ... Here's one

SOMEWHERE AROUND THE MIDDLE OF THE WORLD TRADE CENTER THERE WAS THIS ORANGE AND RED FLASH COMING OUT INITIALLY IT WAS JUST ONE FLASH THEN THIS FLASH JUST KEPT POPPING ALL THE WAY AROUND THE BUILDING AND THAT BUILDING HAD STARTED TO EXPLODE THE POPPING SOUND AND WITH EACH POPPING SOUND IT WAS INITIALLY AN ORANGE AND THEN RED FLASH CAME OUT OF THE BUILDING AND THEN IT WOULD JUST GO ALL AROUND THE BUILDING ON BOTH SIDES AS FAR AS COULD SEE THESE POPPING SOUNDS AND THE EXPLOSIONS WERE GETTING BIGGER GOING BOTH UP AND DOWN AND THEN ALL AROUND THE BUILDING

I say let's totally disregard ALL eyewitness testimony and video evidence then and stick to pjysical evidence, engineering reports and papers,

Originally posted by Fluffaluffagous

Originally posted by totallackey
There are objective corroborations to eyewitness testimony

No. there isn't. Some have convinced themselves that they are being honest and objective when they interpret evidence, like you appear to be doing.
The concensus about that is that your interpretation is wrong.

Nobody gives two shakes about a consensus. What interpretation have I offered? Aside from the obvious appeal to numbers argumentation you blatantly you use as a bludgeon, I would ask this:
If 2 people claim they saw a eight foot tall kangaroo grasping a large rifle would you believe it on the testimony alone? Maybe, maybe not...but if you were to gain access to a stand alone camera and was able to pull a photograph from that stand alone camera that looked like this:

Image obtained from:

Originally posted by Fluffaluffagous

Originally posted by totallackey
You got proof any of it was doctored? Please fork it over...

any of what?
there's plenty that have been shown to have been doctored by thise (sic)that espouse the whole 9/11 was an inside job view. Some research on your part would bring this to light.

Originally posted by Fluffaluffagous

Originally posted by totallackey
There are papers and engineering reports concerning steel, structural failure points, and comparison studies, concerning the collapse of 1/2/7.

And again, the consensus is that those engineers don't understand the subject matter and their views are beliefs are therefore wrong.
You have nothing.