As a 911 truther (for two years standing, come december), the narrative that I hold as most accurate includes everything within the blue outline. However, I dispute the 'not provable' and 'probably not true' categorys. For the former, the commandeering of the planes was amply documented (in this video: http://youtu.be/ENSpEbiJ1PA) to have been undertaken through the use of a flight termination system, with directions given by a mysterious AWACS. For the latter, the various phenomena that were observed with the WTCs collapse were satisfactorily proven (in this video: http://youtu.be/ww8hBFNY8jk) to be consistent with a controlled demolition, rather than a fire induced progressive collapse.
Furthermore, I vigorously reject the implicit claim that arguing about the physics of 911 is counterproductive to our pursuit for renewed public awareness. On the contrary, I have found in my many arguments with the defenders of the official story, that the anomalys and inconsistencys with the twin towers collapses is the biggest hole present in the government account. Even some of the worlds greatest experts have been at a loss to explain how the mechanical failures could have progressed in the manner they did.
As for the assertion that 'the twin towers and WTC 7 were bulging and leaning before they fell down', this supposed structural degradation is not evident in surviving photographs and videos of the WTCs between
8:46 AM and 9:59 AM (archived by 9-11 research), which show no motion before the
precipitous onset of each destruction event. NIST has only produced one
photograph allegedly showing bowing of columns in the north tower, and two
photographs presumably displaying bowing of columns in the south tower. Assuming the photographs were not edited, there are other explanations for the
appearance, such as parallax error, distortion, divergence, as well as related skewing and artifacts due to lenses and other known motion film and video camera characteristics.
No comments:
Post a Comment