The No Plane Theory - September Clues

**Ezzz** · 03-30-2008, 09:26 AM

Originally Posted by Night Nurse

Have an open mind about EVERYTHING you read and see! NEVER take anything at face value. Learn that authors, artists, photographers etc may have an agenda in the information that they distribute (advertising is the most overt example and politics being the most covert).

Propaganda is rife throughout every nation and made by every government not just by those that are anti-west.

Fine NN. But please realize after the first plane hit the trade center. Thousands of people were standing around looking up at the towers and SAW the other plane hit. lol Just saying!!

**Night Nurse** · 03-30-2008, 09:49 AM

Paul I was speaking in general... I was neither backing nor condemning this thread but truely believe we should have an open mind about anything that is laid in front of us not just merely advertising (having said that I'm sure a percentage of the population believes in it... but I assume the majority of members of LP are not overly gullible).

**Ezzz** · 03-30-2008, 10:29 AM

A great mind being interviewed.

YouTube - 9/11 Truth Protestors get PWNED by Opie & Anthony Part 1

**ZaphodBBrox** · 03-30-2008, 12:00 PM

The woman (Theresa?) speaking with Bryant Gumble did not need superhuman sight to see the second plane hit the tower. She was probably watching on TV like a large portion of the country was at that time. It was clearly a plane that hit the second tower. We saw that as it happened.
People saw it as it happened LIVE. Thousands of them. A few said they thought it was a missle. Exponentially fewer than said they were planes. Remember that the first plane went in with it's wings at an angle to the ground. This is supported by the shape of the hole in the tower. If a persons angle of sight is such that the angle to the wing on their side is then equal... the wing would be hard to discern. You would predominantly see the silhoutte of the fuselage... which could look like a missle if seen only briefly prior to smashing into the tower.
There's lots more... this is just off the top of my head. Conspiracy theory can be fun, confusing and convoluted. There would be an ENORMOUS line of people saying there were no planes if in fact there weren't. Not even our government can cover-up and quiet people on that level. Especially New Yorkers. They'd piss in a feeb's face before they'd retract what they truly saw.
One more thing. The lame "evidence" of the plane's photo not being blurred due to it's speed? Perfect example of how evidence can be twisted. Supposedly an expert photog is saying it takes wicked skills to get a non-blurred photo of a car going by at 160mph... let alone a plane at 500+mph. True.
True if the plane is the same distance away from the photographer. 160mph goes by you at a distance of say 100 feet damn quickly. It's (once again) angles. the further away the object is... the slower it appears to be moving. Even a moron NASCAR fan can tell you the cars zoooooooom by right in front of them but appear to be traveling a lot slower on the backstretch.
NEXT!

**bluffmanxx** · 03-30-2008, 12:14 PM

Originally Posted by ZaphodBBrox

The woman (Theresa?) speaking with Bryant Gumble did not need superhuman sight to see the second plane hit the tower. She was probably watching on TV like a large portion of the country was at that time. It was clearly a plane that hit the second tower. We saw that as it happened.
People saw it as it happened LIVE. Thousands of them. A few said they thought it was a missle. Exponentially fewer than said they were planes. Remember that the first plane went in with it's wings at an angle to the ground. This is supported by the shape of the hole in the tower. If a persons angle of sight is such that the angle to the wing on their side is then equal... the wing would be hard to discern. You would predominantly see the silhoutte of the fuselage... which could look like a missle if seen only briefly prior to smashing into the tower.
There's lots more... this is just off the top of my head. Conspiracy theory can be fun, confusing and convoluted. There would be an ENORMOUS line of people saying there were no planes if in fact there weren't. Not even our government can cover-up and quiet people on that level. Especially New Yorkers. They'd piss in a feeb's face before they'd retract what they truly saw.
One more thing. The lame "evidence" of the plane's photo not being blurred due to it's speed? Perfect example of how evidence can be twisted. Supposedly an expert photog is saying it takes wicked skills to get a non-blurred photo of a car going by at 160mph... let alone a plane at 500+mph. True.
True if the plane is the same distance away from the photographer. 160mph goes by you at a distance of say 100 feet damn quickly. It's (once again) angles. the further away the object is... the slower it appears to be moving. Even a moron NASCAR fan can tell you the cars zoooooooom by right in front of them but appear to be traveling a lot slower on the backstretch.
NEXT!

You are gonna be in big trouble with the conspiracy crowd if you keep using FACTS, LOGIC and COMMON SENSE