Reply #12: Wraith... [View All]

[ThePentaCon]

The damage track through the building, the radar track, and the damage to the ground installations all clearly agree on the path taken by the plane.

Wrong. What radar are you referring to? The only that is clearly agreed is that they always have conflicted with the witness accounts and have never been 100% clear, accurate and documented.


There's a principle in forensic science that when a witness and physical evidence disagree, the physical evidence is right. This is because it's easy for eyewitnesses to be mistaken--misremembering, forgetting details or having their brain fill in details that they didn't really see.

That's fine. But the 'physical evidence' was what was caused the questioning in the first place, now you have evidence to support why we were seeing the anomlies that we all couldn't agree on.

However, I do apprecciate some of your images. The last one, particularly, shows quite clearly the size of the plane's main fuselage versus the size of the impact holes, and the damage caused by the thicker portion of the wings. It pretty obviously debunks the "too small to be a plane" meme.

Well it is too small for a boeing 757.