QUOTE (dlaliberte @ Jan 28 2010, 05:25 PM)
This is your claim, but I think the paper only shows that the flight path that INCLUDES the light pole collisions is not feasible. I am just asking for the further analysis that shows there is no flight path that DOES NOT include the light pole collisions but DOES include the other damage to the exterior. The angle of entry might be wrong for explaining the damage to the C-ring that is visible from the outside, but for that we might suppose that damage was caused by pre-placed explosives. After all, if you are going to suggest that the whole explosion was due to pre-placed explosives, it would not be as difficult to only explode the holes (3 of them) on the C-ring.
I am persuaded by the several eyewitnesses who saw the plane on the north of Citgo, but I am not persuaded by the one witness who saw a plane fly away. Are there more who claimed to see it fly away?
There are many
data points of damage that delineate a very specific trajectory leading all the way to the C-ring hole.
This is a fact
that is not contestable and not reliant upon a single official report. It is not merely my "claim".
You need at least 2 data points to delineate a damage trajectory north of the Citgo and these do not exist.
In absence of this evidence, particularly ZERO downed light poles on the north side approach, it is not remotely logical to dismiss out of hand the direct evidence for a flyover in favor of a wild purely speculative based theory that requires a relatively slow moving, right banking, large aircraft to completely disintegrate low and level into the first floor of the building without damaging the lawn or the foundation.
You can refuse to accept the implications of the evidence (while flat out dismissing direct evidence) all you want but doing so based on an unsupported illogical theory that requires even more
staging than the plane NOT hitting defies Occam's razor and serves to diminish the significance of what we do
have and is therefore counter-productive to the campaign to expose 9/11 truth.
Whether or not you accept the obvious implications we have enough evidence to prove a deception dlaliberte .
Please contribute productively by focusing on seeking justice