Who cares to debate the events of 9/11/2001 based upon the laws of physics?

[octopus]

@Jay_Jay

does anyone have ANY sort of documented eye witness statement at all?
where is the documentation?

So let’s say you are right and the US government headed by the MAN has a captured Beyonder from Area 51 that they have brainwashed into falsifying all the so-called TeeVee footage and all the 'MEMORIES of The simulacrums that replaced the normal inhabitants of NYC. Why fight such power? Surely you don’t expect plucky Jay_Jay and a few disciples to bring down the whole supernaturally powerful establishment.

[Jay_Jay]

@snfaulkner

Are you serious? You can’t fucking be arsed to read anyone’s posts?

I do not see where YOU have addressed the science here at all
if you have please cite a specific post.

[Leaper]

So is every respectable physicist and demolitions expert on the face of the planet being paid off to stay absolutely silent about this “obvious” thing?

[running_coach]

@Jay_Jay

I do not see where YOU have addressed the science here at all
if you have please cite a specific post.

There has to be science before it can be addressed.

[Jay_Jay]

@octopus

So let’s say you are right and the US government headed by the MAN has a captured Beyonder from Area 51 that they have brainwashed into falsifying all the so-called TeeVee footage and all the 'MEMORIES of The simulacrums that replaced the normal inhabitants of NYC. Why fight such power? Surely you don’t expect plucky Jay_Jay and a few disciples to bring down the whole supernaturally powerful establishment.

so in other words in the total absence of documentation to back up the claim there were great multitudes of eye witnesses, you then shift to hyperbole to cover for the fact that you promoted an unfounded assumption.

[Leaper]

@running_coach

There has to be science before it can be addressed.

Right. So his understanding of the science involved is mistaken and/or incorrect.

Next thread, please.

[Jay_Jay]

@running_coach

There has to be science before it can be addressed.

and so the argument about how there must be serious deceleration of the alleged airliner upon the nose contacting the wall, this is NOT to be considered scientific?
what?

[running_coach]

@Jay_Jay

so in other words in the total absence of documentation to back up the claim there were great multitudes of eye witnesses, you then shift to hyperbole to cover for the fact that you promoted an unfounded assumption.

You missed my link.
http://11-sept.org/survivors.html

Of course, you ignoring the TV coverage, the thousands in the street, all the survivors of those killed.

[Jay_Jay]

@Leaper

So is every respectable physicist and demolitions expert on the face of the planet being paid off to stay absolutely silent about this “obvious” thing?

do you know about AE911TRUTH?
the fact is that there are experts with some really serious credentials
who have weighed in on this subject and state that the ONLY way that the towers and 7 could have been destroyed in the manner observed would have been controlled demolition.

[running_coach]

@Jay_Jay

and so the argument about how there must be serious deceleration of the alleged airliner upon the nose contacting the wall, this is NOT to be considered scientific?
what?

There was serious deceleration. Extremely serious deceleration.Who said there wasn’t?

[Leaper]

@Jay_Jay

the fact is that there are experts with some really serious credentials

Credentials in what? And why doesn’t the entire global community of their peers and colleagues agree with them, if it’s as simple as applying known science?

@Jay_Jay

and so the argument about how there must be serious deceleration of the alleged airliner upon the nose contacting the wall, this is NOT to be considered scientific?
what?

You know, while flying in a modern airplane, it’s easy to lose your sense of how fast those things are capable of traveling. So yes, there probably was serious deceleration. But not enough, and certainly not when inertia also comes into play. (Someone feel free to correct me if I’m getting something wrong.)

And does “alleged” airliner mean you think there was no plane collision at all?

[running_coach]

@Jay_Jay

do you know about AE911TRUTH?
the fact is that there are experts with some really serious credentials
who have weighed in on this subject and state that the ONLY way that the towers and 7 could have been destroyed in the manner observed would have been controlled demolition.

We all know that pile of shit. You think you’re the first 9/11 truther we’ve had?

[running_coach]

@Leaper

You know, while flying in a modern airplane, it’s easy to lose your sense of how fast those things are capable of traveling. So yes, there probably was serious deceleration. But not enough, and certainly not when inertia also comes into play. (Someone feel free to correct me if I’m getting something wrong.)

And does “alleged” airliner mean you think there was no plane collision at all?

He’s not sure. He keeps going back and forth.

[Darren_Garrison]

@octopus

So let’s say you are right and the US government headed by the MAN has a captured Beyonder from Area 51 that they have brainwashed into falsifying all the so-called TeeVee footage and all the 'MEMORIES of The simulacrums that replaced the normal inhabitants of NYC. Why fight such power?

No matter what the power, people who dress like this must be opposed!

[running_coach]

@Darren_Garrison

No matter what the power, people who dress like this must be opposed!

It’s Donny Osmond! From the FUTURE!!!

[Jay_Jay]

@running_coach

You missed my link.
http://11-sept.org/survivors.html

Of course, you ignoring the TV coverage, the thousands in the street, all the survivors of those killed.

TV = TELL-LIE-VISION
also of the “eye witness” more like ear witness in that the most often reported bit
was “I heard a huge explosion” they didn’t see the alleged airliner at all.

and as for the survivors of those who lost their lives that day, how many of these people were in any sort of position to see first hand what was going on?

Where is the EYE WITNESS account that states they saw the airliner penetrate the skyscraper wall?

[cochrane]

@Jay_Jay

I don’t harbor expectations about this sort of thing, its all
just take it as it comes, I will say that I’m disappointed in the
level of actual science in this discussion, if anybody has a problem with
a specific bit of the science argument that I have presented, please by
all means express it, however, what has happened is unfortunately
a degeneration into humor and tangents and unfounded accusations
about the lack of foundation in my arguments without citing specifics.
its a sick sad world!

We are discussing science. It’s just real-world science, not your fantasy science. Or are you taking Adam Savage’s words literally? “I reject your reality and substitute my own!”

[octopus]

@Jay_Jay

so in other words in the total absence of documentation to back up the claim there were great multitudes of eye witnesses, you then shift to hyperbole to cover for the fact that you promoted an unfounded assumption.

So you truly believe no one saw the planes crash into the buildings? All the video, which is documentation btw, all the everything is one giant ILLUSION!!11! ?

I saw the 2nd plane hit the tower on the news as it happened. I must have been one of those mind controlled by the Beyonder.

But Jay_Jay is here to fix all that. So tell us Jay_Jay how does one plucky PhD in armchair engineering overcome the power of a conspiracy that can fool the whole country minus 2 or 3 people who have it all figured out due to the power of 8th grade algebra.

[running_coach]

@Jay_Jay

TV = TELL-LIE-VISION
also of the “eye witness” more like ear witness in that the most often reported bit
was “I heard a huge explosion” they didn’t see the alleged airliner at all.

and as for the survivors of those who lost their lives that day, how many of these people were in any sort of position to see first hand what was going on?

Where is the EYE WITNESS account that states they saw the airliner penetrate the skyscraper wall?

So you’re claiming the entire city was empty and the whole thing was staged?

[Jay_Jay]

@running_coach

He’s not sure. He keeps going back and forth.

to clear up any misconceptions here
I am quite certain that it was NOT any commercial airliner that struck either tower or the Pentagon.
now as for what did exactly, WHO KNOWS?
the fact is that it is possible to know that an illusion has been done,
without having to describe in detail HOW said illusion was done.
.
'nuff said?