Ok there is a computer program called tracker and kinovea By dropping the passports from differing heights both with nothing with it and with other objects of different drag. The programs can track the time of fall.
The soaking makes it faster based on the fact it prevents occurrence of the pages opening and creating a drag.
This is something you can do for yourself.
This is i freely admit not the most scientific way perhaps, but it was only for me to get a rough idea of fall times
What i wanted to know was, if the passport was on the floor or a cabin and then fell (assuming the plane split away from it) could it descend below the belly of the plane before the entire plane passed into the building.
I had to estimate the belly height from bottom to where the passenger floor is based on comparitive heights of people and luggage and the actual height of the cabin which can be found on boeings site etc because i could not find the actual size of the cargo area and boeing would not tell me when i asked.
But essentially because i estimated it to be over multiple tests, about 0.6 seconds to fall 6 feet, and that the plane as best as i can calculate, is entirely inside the building in 1.s this meant that based on the location of the passport it was not possible to fall below the plane and therefore needed to be blown backwards or go forwards.
The amount of debris inside as well as walls and other obstacles made it very doubtful that it actually would have made it through, and explosive separation from a body or bag requires explosives. The force of a fire ball MAY just be sufficient to burn clothes off or a bag, but then the force is expended and again, the fire can only push an explosive force once ignited.
So the passport cannot be ahead of the fuel to be soaked (source FBI) therefore indicating it was behind the wings at the least, then, and only then does it have a slightest chance to fall clear of the plane if it drops down and falls directly below impact zone.
Which again is something you can leap on but at that point you honestly think it will have people directly under where you have debris falling and NO cop nearer than Vesey street?
Bottom line is you don't know where it was found, hence any calculations about how far it might have travelled, or in what direction, are entirely irrelevant.
You need to demonstrate that it could not have ended up outside the building. You have not done this.
Mick i can't see the post i was just notified of but in my email i see you question how far, well the explosive force can be calculated, and i cannot do that, however remember that there IS a limit to how far it can go. That distance has to factor in the force of which it was travelling if we say it blew backwards, it cannot and will not be blown back at a force of say 10 mps if it was going the other way at 40 mps, it may be very light as you said, but hit a wall and it drops straight to the floor.
Out in the open, if pages are open it is even more subject to the wind, if they are not it falls extremely close to impact aided by wind and is not at all likely to be found by a passerby without a cop being nearer than vesey street, except, that to be in position to have the remotest fraction of a second chance ONLY IF the plane opened up to let it, the passport had to be further back in the plane. So did Suqami go to suppress a revolt? That is off topic but all things lead on to other questions.
Do you care WHERE it was found or do you just care that you debunk me.
Like i said i could care less for being wrong but i don't see i am any more wrong than you are right. You have challenged location but that is debatable not a solid debunk.
is entirely inside the building in 1.s this meant that based on the location of the passport it was not possible to fall below the plane and therefore needed to be blown backwards or go forwards.
Bottom line is you don't know where it was found, hence any calculations about how far it might have travelled, or in what direction, are entirely irrelevant.
You need to demonstrate that it could not have ended up outside the building. You have not done this.
Well i think that the window for it to end up backwards is microscopic, the fact it was fuel soaked indicates it cant pass through raging fire unignited and as that WAS so inside, it didn't pass through.
So we are left with the microscopic chance it fell through the plane IF the floor opend up, Which i cant prove it didnt, however the tests done by another then show just how far back it could go (see the link before)
So what we have to make this correct is a microscopic factor being realised, some person walks directly under impact zone for some reason, sees it, walks up to vesey street and hands it in and that's all the publically available detail
Well if microscopic is wha it hangs on, so be it,
I guess that is as much as i can go to because i have no more data currently.
Yes BUT it can't then be soaked in jet fuel.
If it was not under the wings or rather a row or two behind so that it came directly under the wings when they hit, it then means the passport is ahead of the fuel, now that then means the fuel accelerated to catch up with the passport. Then the splash did not change its trajectory,up or down, and as the fire ball ignited, it just merrily pushed the passport ajead, and moved it gently around all the obstacles ( bear in mind the angle that it hit the wtc it was across more than one floor And for its best chance to get through it needs to be at about head height where no intermediary is, we know the division of the officies can assure us of at least 2 walls between the next window on the opposite side. And of course the center columns which based on the angle the plane hit, is primarily where the plane hit, more centrally- provable by the visual evidence available.
So unless they said it came out with no jet fuel over it, no it cant have come out the other side (and again even then it would be luck to avoid all obstacles and there was no big exit hole the opposite side)
Yep - as I said - the chances of this EXACT circumstance happening are very slim - and yet the actual available evidence suggests that this is exactly what happened.
Such a situation is in fact extremely common in every day life - the chances of you being conceived by your parent were actually vanishingly small - out of the billions of possible combinations that might have ben conceived "you" got lucky.
Similarly if you play cards - the chances of any given 5 cards being dealt in a 4-hand game is about 1:2,600,000 - and yet those cards do get dealt.
Your argument from incredulity is correct AFAIK - the odds ARE very low - but the odds do not constitute evidence of anything.
Yes i can suggest 3
1. Planted as hopes of discovery just as an additional link to a conspiracy (who/why is not something i would speculate on)
2. Planted because someone knew it was a conspiracy and wanted to lay a smoking gun but couldnt blow the whistle without losing their lives.
3. The microscopic option is the truth and it just happens sometimes that million to one chances occur, we see people win the lottery at odds of 46 million to one and don't imagine a conspiracy there
My personal judgements of culpability/conspiracy are attributable to a number of coincidences and errors and so forth which are not on topic and are varied.
The reason i come here, is, if anyone will prove me wrong its debunkers. And of course pick up on flaws in your work. There are some major outlandish conspiracies out there and it is best to not believe one side or another until you research and have it attacked by someone, if it stands up it has a possibility if it crumbles apart easily, then it's clear bs
So unless they said it came out with no jet fuel over it, no it cant have come out the other side (and again even then it would be luck to avoid all obstacles and there was no big exit hole the opposite side)
We know that because the seat number given by the official version. Although exact details are still classified we must take what the fbi and faa etc tell us.
So when i say initially in my image where it was it is based off that.
However the assumption (unprovable) that he may have slipped it in a pocket on boarding like most people do, then leads with transcripts if they are all to be believed from people like betty ong, to assume he was in the cockpit, which if so that is where the passport would be.
Iff you mean about behind the wings, as i said, you cant get wet fuel on anything if you're ahead of the tanks when they rupture
Yes i can suggest 3
1. Planted as hopes of discovery just as an additional link to a conspiracy (who/why is not something i would speculate on)
2. Planted because someone knew it was a conspiracy and wanted to lay a smoking gun but couldnt blow the whistle without losing their lives.
3. The microscopic option is the truth and it just happens sometimes that million to one chances occur, we see people win the lottery at odds of 46 million to one and don't imagine a conspiracy there
My personal judgements of culpability/conspiracy are attributable to a number of coincidences and errors and so forth which are not on topic and are varied.
The reason i come here, is, if anyone will prove me wrong its debunkers. And of course pick up on flaws in your work. There are some major outlandish conspiracies out there and it is best to not believe one side or another until you research and have it attacked by someone, if it stands up it has a possibility if it crumbles apart easily, then it's clear bs
Yes it has a possibility - no one is arguing otherwise.
However not all possibilities have to be seriously considered - and your assessment of them is actually poisoning the well.
I would rewrite your options as:
1. Planted as hopes of discovery just as an additional link to a conspiracy (there is no actual evidence to support this)
2. Planted because someone knew it was a conspiracy and wanted to lay a smoking gun but couldn't blow the whistle without losing their lives. (there is no actual evidence to support this)
3. The passport was in the aircraft and scattered due to the crash, explosions and collapse. (All the available verifiable evidence points to this)
Well the fact of that is patently false based on the known and very provable cover up, refusal to investigate and requests to NOT investigate, the gagging of particular people. IS a cover up of evidence and decided and carried out by more than one.
Even the 9/11 commission said there were lies like noraad faa changing their timelines 3 x and the fact other nations have said we gave info, and the phoenix memo etc all add up to say someone stalled and covered something
But again that's more than is the subject here.
Why? all i have said has equal merit and more so than the microscopic option. You say it like yea boom scatter done. But i think i have shown reasonable doubt it was so easy
And why i want it that way i dont know. I want a conspiracy involving US government/Mossad or others?
Yes and why would that be.
I tell you truly, i believe that an outside element aided in the events of 9/11. I believe on many things. I believe many assumptions i make can be easily explained, as can many explanations by "truth" movement. But there remains many questions.
I have no agenda to be right, to embarrass debunkers. And my sole reason to be right is IF i am. I don't need to come here to troll or argue. I come to put some ideas that bother me, i do not see at all in this case you have done more than say there is a tiny chance it could be as said, i have conceded as much, i do not concede the other options are remote wild theories as they DO carry as much weight as any theory and certainly if you debunk my claims on the basis of you can never know, Thus you must debunk your own too. Except i used science and math and visual evidence and when i couldnt check it i asked someone else who could to verify it. So in this case you achieve stalemate in my eyes, no more. But if you see it otherwise i do not see how you are basing your claims on more than just saying "it happened this way-deal with it"
No i won't i have done that, not here but elsewhere, this is as polite as it gets. So i wont get into slanging etc. Just as i work through things occasionally i will bring something here. I remember the FAMILY JEWELS doc that details how know one knew what they were doing, and the GLADIO details, and i think yea it could be done. And i know about the FBI killing through poisoning alchohol, and the US eugenics program, so i know the capacity exists,
I will slowly work through my research present ideas here, if each is broken apart then fair enough
I would rather believe the interest IS in our safety, although i think it is just patriots see a need to do what needs doing to get the end result.
didn't i? i saw no question i said he could be because of transcript saying where attackers where, the claim of suqami attacking lewin suggest as a definite "attacker" and the attackers being in the cockpit that he was there.
The whole "soaked in jet fuel" is a bit tenuous, just based on one reference. Seems more likely that it smelled strongly of jet fuel, which would have been quite reasonable if it had been in a jet fuel explosion.
And even if it were "soaked", that does not mean that happened before it exited the building.
But you see here we are getting into the whack-a-mole debunking. You's still not really made any specific good claim of evidence. It's all just speculation and assumption.
Mick i can't see the post i was just notified of but in my email i see you question how far, well the explosive force can be calculated, and i cannot do that, however remember that there IS a limit to how far it can go.
I don't think that was me. Perhaps you are referring to a PM/Conversation?
That distance has to factor in the force of which it was travelling if we say it blew backwards, it cannot and will not be blown back at a force of say 10 mps if it was going the other way at 40 mps, it may be very light as you said, but hit a wall and it drops straight to the floor.
Out in the open, if pages are open it is even more subject to the wind, if they are not it falls extremely close to impact aided by wind and is not at all likely to be found by a passerby without a cop being nearer than vesey street, except, that to be in position to have the remotest fraction of a second chance ONLY IF the plane opened up to let it, the passport had to be further back in the plane. So did Suqami go to suppress a revolt? That is off topic but all things lead on to other questions.
Do you care WHERE it was found or do you just care that you debunk me.
Like i said i could care less for being wrong but i don't see i am any more wrong than you are right. You have challenged location but that is debatable not a solid debunk.
I care to arrive at the most correct answer. I don't care what the answer is. In fact it would be vastly more interesting to prove the passport was planted. I think your assumptions are largely incorrect.
If “Everyone’s entitled to their opinion” just means no-one has the right to stop people thinking and saying whatever they want, then the statement is true, but fairly trivial. No one can stop you saying that vaccines cause autism, no matter how many times that claim has been disproven.
But if ‘entitled to an opinion’ means ‘entitled to have your views treated as serious candidates for the truth’ then it’s pretty clearly false. And this too is a distinction that tends to get blurred.
You say it like yea boom scatter done. But i think i have shown reasonable doubt it was so easy
I think you do not actually understand what debunking is - I think you should read Mick's outline A guide to debunking
I don't need to come here to troll or argue. I come to put some ideas that bother me, i do not see at all in this case you have done more than say there is a tiny chance it could be as said, i have conceded as much, i do not concede the other options are remote wild theories as they DO carry as much weight as any theory and certainly if you debunk my claims on the basis of you can never know, Thus you must debunk your own too. Except i used science and math and visual evidence and when i couldnt check it i asked someone else who could to verify it. So in this case you achieve stalemate in my eyes, no more. But if you see it otherwise i do not see how you are basing your claims on more than just saying "it happened this way-deal with it"
I do not need to "debunk my claims", because I make none - the passport is what it is, what is known about it is what is known about it - there is nothing to debunk.
Your claim is in your OP:
]This is not about wanting to make a conspiracy, but THIS is exactly what we need a rational and sensible answer to and nothing really can cut it except either it was planted, or Suqami rolled down his window and dropped his passport out just before impact.
You offer nothing to support your belief that these is the only possible explanations.
your beliefs cannot be debunked - only the evidence that supports them. and since you have no factual evidence that says these must be the case there is nothing to debunk.
...It is not possible for a fuel soaked item to NOT ignite unless it was beyond the reach of the flame, so it exited the plane prior to jet tanks rupturing and then took a small soaking an d rushed ahead of the inferno.
...
A blast wave that precedes the ignited part of an explosion is just air isn't it? It's not on fire.
There was probably not one co-ordinated explosion anyway, there may have been a few in quick succession.
The blast wave from an explosion or a subsequent one might be capable of propelling an object through flame as it would blow it out the way.
Would be interesting if there is tests on that.
And the point that we don't know in what condition it exited the tower is a good one - it may have been part of a larger mass.
You constantly refer to the passport being soaked in fuel. Where does this detail come from? Sorry if you posted this before and I missed it.
How do you know it was soaked through enough to stick the pages together, rather than just had some on the surface?
You constantly refer to the passport being soaked in fuel. Where does this detail come from? Sorry if you posted this before and I missed it.
How do you know it was soaked through enough to stick the pages together, rather than just had some on the surface?
Full document attached, in two parts, this is from page 291, in the second section.
There's no way of knowing how they actually determined it was "soaked" in jet fuel, or what they mean by "soaked". It reminds me of all the people describing non-molten metal as "molten" just because it was a bit sooty. I suspect it simply smelled strongly of jet fuel.
The whole crux of this was whether or not the passport landed and was found in Vesey St.
If it was, I agree that there are questions to be examined about how it got there. If it cannot be determined that Vesey St was where the passport landed after the attack, then the whole question becomes moot, as there is a myriad of possible ways it got there.
We need something that definitively states the passport was found on Vesey St or thereabouts. Does such evidence exist? If so let's see it.
That someone handed it in there who didn't want to hang around in the tumult of the aftermath of the attack, is not necessarily suspicious. I am sure the policeman had many other pressing concerns at the time as well.
Wouldn't the chances of it being found where it was (allegedly) be as much as the chances of any random debris from the plane?
It is only because it is significant in the narrative that it's likelihood is being queried more than other anonymous 'non-significant' bits.
Wouldn't the chances of it being found where it was (allegedly) be as much as the chances of any random debris from the plane?
It is only because it is significant in the narrative that it's likelihood is being queried more than other anonymous 'non-significant' bits.
I could not get that far into that Gish Gallop, but just to address what I saw, 1. "strange luck" happens. Isn't there some story about a woman who lost her wedding band down the sink and her husband caught a fish that ate it. In our local paper was an article about someone who lost a class ring like 50 years ago, it was found recently by someone else in his class. 2. There WERE many other ID cards found, there are photos of them on this website. Boxes of them.
*/4-d/p;jt76rhnjg54w3vxszQA
Yep - as I said - the chances of this EXACT circumstance happening are very slim - and yet the actual available evidence suggests that this is exactly what happened.
...
Your argument from incredulity is correct AFAIK - the odds ARE very low - but the odds do not constitute evidence of anything.
While I thought the collapses of WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 where each in themselves improbable, the combined probabilities become very very small, and so I was forced to a position of reasonable doubt. It was only by understanding the structure of the buildings that I realised that each building would probably have collapsed. So my reasonable doubt evaporated. Any remaining doubt would be unreasonable.
In the case of this passport, I will have reasonable doubt unless the probability of this event can be increased.
If the event is possible, then I would expect to find other personal debris from the passengers.
Michael Sheehan, a broker working on the 55th floor of 2 World Trade Center, moved to the stairwell when he realized a plane had crashed into 1 World Trade Center. By the time he reached the 25th floor, he could smell the fumes of fuel that had begun to filter through the ventilation systems of the two buildings. On the street, standing in a shower of office paper and the siding from the building, he found a piece of paper. It was an airliner's itinerary, listing information about a flight from Boston to Los Angeles.
"I realized then that it was a commercial flight. Then the second plane hit. I realized then it was terror."
Mr. RICHARD MARX (FBI Special Agent): It's been good. I've met some of the finest people that New York City has to offer that have worked alongside of us tirelessly, recovering small bits and pieces of people' s lives. And we were finding basically the small fragments, whether it's pieces of jewelry, their personal identification, things that were recovered from on top of their desks. Just recently we found a wallet of one of the passengers aboard Flight 11, so if we can give that back to a family, I think all of us did our best to do so.
On September 11 2002, one year Anniversary of the death of our son, we were informed that the Recovery team at Ground Zero have found the ATM Bank card of Waleed [Iskandar, passenger on Flight 11] and that it will be mailed to us in Northridge. When we received it, we found it in good condition.
How could a plastic card survive the fire of the terrorist attack of the Black Tuesday on the USA?
I consider it as a sign from Waleed to his parents on the first Anniversary of his loss.
A few days before the first anniversary of our daughter's murder, we were notified that they had found a piece of her in the piles and piles of gritty rubble of the World Trade Center that had been hauled out to Staten Island. It was Lisa's way, we believe, of telling us she wasn't lost.
In February, the day of the Columbia tragedy, we got word they'd found her United Airlines Mileage Plus card. It was found very near where they'd found a piece of her right hip. We imagine that she used the card early on the morning of Sept. 11 to get on the plane and just stuck it in her back pocket, probably her right back pocket, instead of in her purse. They have found no other personal effects".
On Oct. 12, it arrived inside a second envelope at Mrs. Snyder's modest white house on Main Street here, and the instant she took it out and saw it, she says, chills just went over me. It was singed and crumpled. A chunk was ripped out, giving the bottom of the envelope she had sent the look of a jagged skyline. Mrs. Snyder's lyrical script had blurred into the scorched paper. The stamp, depicting a World War II sailor embracing a woman welcoming him home, was intact.
Along with the letter was a note: To whom it may concern. This was found floating around the street in downtown New York. I am sorry if you suffered any loss in this tragedy. Sincerely, a friend in New York!
Since then, Mrs. Snyder, a customer service representative at a grocery store, has discovered that she has one of only two pieces of mail known to have been recovered from the planes that crashed into the World Trade Center. At least one auction house has contacted her, saying she could sell the letter for tens of thousands of dollars.
Suqami's passport was found by a passerby (identity unknown), reportedly in the vicinity of Vesey Street,[8] before the towers collapsed Source wikipaedia
I wont provide multiples for all because if you know nothing then you are sungularly unqualified to debunk based on more than opinion.
There rests sufficient which i can assert again i took from scouring Nist, 9/11 commission, media most committed to the official line
That is a problem with most CTs, they only will provide the one source that backs up the claim.
So we see no debunk, what is required is not a better verification of what i am saying, a passport MAY have inertia more so than paper, but you need to look at the physics look at how much exited the north tower, and how, and where it came from, multiple files and papers stacked and on the far side can be ejected, but First where was the passport. If you have multiple untouched id/and papers (papers already in the offices not inside a plane. The passport can't exit even the plane until the plane breaks, this means the section where it exits has hit or caught or blown apart due to some force, assuming this has NO impact on the passport it must continue in a direction and hit nothing, AND be soaked in fuel.
I'd have run away also if i was standing near the WTC, with debris falling, flying all over the place. Wouldn't you?
What matters is we can as said prove the plane impact direction, we can even through some images and video see the speeds fire spread, objects in the hole, and have testimony and images of debris on the street,.
What matters is exactly where the passport was found
We will never know that, will we? The unidentified man apparently did not tell the policeman where he found it. Maybe he found it exactly where YOU THINK he should have and was heading back home, uptown, and handed it to the first cop he saw.
And to me, i have to be attacked as with every debunker because i wont be brushed off too easy.
No i won't i have done that, not here but elsewhere, this is as polite as it gets. So i wont get into slanging etc. Just as i work through things occasionally i will bring something here. I remember the FAMILY JEWELS doc that details how know one knew what they were doing, and the GLADIO details, and i think yea it could be done. And i know about the FBI killing through poisoning alchohol, and the US eugenics program, so i know the capacity exists,
I will slowly work through my research present ideas here, if each is broken apart then fair enough
I would rather believe the interest IS in our safety, although i think it is just patriots see a need to do what needs doing to get the end result.
While I thought the collapses of WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 where each in themselves improbable, the combined probabilities become very very small, and so I was forced to a position of reasonable doubt. It was only by understanding the structure of the buildings that I realised that each building would probably have collapsed. So my reasonable doubt evaporated. Any remaining doubt would be unreasonable.
In the case of this passport, I will have reasonable doubt unless the probability of this event can be increased.
If the event is possible, then I would expect to find other personal debris from the passengers.
Michael Sheehan, a broker working on the 55th floor of 2 World Trade Center, moved to the stairwell when he realized a plane had crashed into 1 World Trade Center. By the time he reached the 25th floor, he could smell the fumes of fuel that had begun to filter through the ventilation systems of the two buildings. On the street, standing in a shower of office paper and the siding from the building, he found a piece of paper. It was an airliner's itinerary, listing information about a flight from Boston to Los Angeles.
"I realized then that it was a commercial flight. Then the second plane hit. I realized then it was terror."
Mr. RICHARD MARX (FBI Special Agent): It's been good. I've met some of the finest people that New York City has to offer that have worked alongside of us tirelessly, recovering small bits and pieces of people' s lives. And we were finding basically the small fragments, whether it's pieces of jewelry, their personal identification, things that were recovered from on top of their desks. Just recently we found a wallet of one of the passengers aboard Flight 11, so if we can give that back to a family, I think all of us did our best to do so.
On September 11 2002, one year Anniversary of the death of our son, we were informed that the Recovery team at Ground Zero have found the ATM Bank card of Waleed [Iskandar, passenger on Flight 11] and that it will be mailed to us in Northridge. When we received it, we found it in good condition.
How could a plastic card survive the fire of the terrorist attack of the Black Tuesday on the USA?
I consider it as a sign from Waleed to his parents on the first Anniversary of his loss.
A few days before the first anniversary of our daughter's murder, we were notified that they had found a piece of her in the piles and piles of gritty rubble of the World Trade Center that had been hauled out to Staten Island. It was Lisa's way, we believe, of telling us she wasn't lost.
In February, the day of the Columbia tragedy, we got word they'd found her United Airlines Mileage Plus card. It was found very near where they'd found a piece of her right hip. We imagine that she used the card early on the morning of Sept. 11 to get on the plane and just stuck it in her back pocket, probably her right back pocket, instead of in her purse. They have found no other personal effects".
On Oct. 12, it arrived inside a second envelope at Mrs. Snyder's modest white house on Main Street here, and the instant she took it out and saw it, she says, chills just went over me. It was singed and crumpled. A chunk was ripped out, giving the bottom of the envelope she had sent the look of a jagged skyline. Mrs. Snyder's lyrical script had blurred into the scorched paper. The stamp, depicting a World War II sailor embracing a woman welcoming him home, was intact.
Along with the letter was a note: To whom it may concern. This was found floating around the street in downtown New York. I am sorry if you suffered any loss in this tragedy. Sincerely, a friend in New York!
Since then, Mrs. Snyder, a customer service representative at a grocery store, has discovered that she has one of only two pieces of mail known to have been recovered from the planes that crashed into the World Trade Center. At least one auction house has contacted her, saying she could sell the letter for tens of thousands of dollars.
What we are seeing is stuff found after, and a random few bits. And as i said i will provide further to demonstrate the lack of chance it would exit the building.
The odds however are not equal to finding any bit anywhere.
The odds of finding any bit anywhere rely on the chances of it actually being possible to be there-Hence i will work on further defining that.
So far i have only to prove from multiple sources and reliable, it was found in Vesey street. And then we will meet the next objection being built. Was it soaked
As i said before, what really needs doing is that you decide who you will accept evidence from.
If you say your "it was there,cos it was" idea is as valid as a whole range of reasons, why do you not have to have equal burden of proof?
You say Gish Gallop or whatever, but each improbability or low probability of occurence is stackable, and do matter so it is not gish gallop.
If i prove the Vesey street, the next piece of evidence for where it was, is subject to
Speculation of where Suqami was/whether it was soaked or smelled of fuel.
Soaked is not a metaphor for damp, nor moist nor, wet, nor smelly- Soaked is used to define an extreme degree of those things
Now if i can present facts and you decide they did not mean what they say then again you distort the official version to fit the official version
I would like to add for whoever said, air pushed ahead of fire is not ON fire etc CORRECT but if an object is ahead of that, then this blast of air is fine if it went forwards. If it went backwards, this happens only in the backdraft causing a vacuum which extends only so far and only occurs in certain conditions
Anyway, i am sure i can find further details. But how many sources are needed? I mean it is a waste of time to try anything if in the end the result is you discount because you THINK they meant, or it is UNLIKELY to be etc
If i am not allowed improbabilities i suggest that should work two ways?
So correct me if i am wrong before i go to gather what i can-
I need to prove a) it would NOT exit the building
b.) It landed in ......< to be defined
c) ??????????
Yes, i agree, after all i include that the chair made it through, what i am saying is- Which plane, which pieces, and before or after?
There is entirely a possibility of this being so.
However the AA11 did not punch out the other side (verifiable from visual detail)and because it hit the central columns which we have to admit for the very fact that if we assert severance of these caused a drop, observe that that drop is straight down, indicating with no conspiracy attached, that the center columns were the ones hit else we would see a larger tilt.
The south tower though being hit to the side, meant the plane went further in and we visually see objects burst out
To say at this stage there is NO chance it came out would make me stupid. All i am am saying is that it seems there is an element of doubt.
As i said and was dismissed on, probabilities do factor into whether something is believable. So to enter the building/exit the containment of locker/bag/pocket/be doused in fuel/be found in an improbable location/be ANYTHING from flight 11( Clearly probability is still on my side given the vast amount of wtc papers and id's recovered vs the amount of airplane and papers and even bodies recovered from AA11)
Hence the probability is cause for reasonable doubt, and statistical probabilities are factored into many things including the opinions of psychologists which essentialy boil down to statistical probability of conforming to pre established behavioural conditions. So it is fair to base at least DOUBT on that.
I guess if the passport had been found, in a pretty bad state (other flights were mentioned which they were in a much worse state and where the fuel was not enclosed in a small space or the craft encapsulated in a building) And any record defining less ambiguously the details of location. I would find it believable
But to simply answer yes indeed, as it stands with no conclusive confirmation of the final resting spot. It is possible to conclude it MAY be so.
But what do you say the other way? That it is Impossible that it could be planted (exclusive of explaining the why of that)?
