I recently was put on one of those mostly useless email threads loaded with 9/11 accusations but decided to enter the fray (against better counsel) with this entry:
There are many things wrong with the 9/11 plane theory (www.nomoregames.net) but one is the proposition that 767 wings can stay intact/attached in a high-speed, violent collision with a maxi-strength tower and those wings disappear inside said tower. Not to mention heavy tail sections disappearing within too. And such unprecedented (alleged) crashes occurred twice within 16.5 minutes? Wow. To paraphrase Gerard Holmgren, why don’t we have rotary aluminum blades and hacksaws for cutting steel today?
Watch this 46 sec. video of hijacked Ethiopian Airlines flight 961, a 767 out-of-fuel, trying to make a low-speed, soft landing adjacent to a Comoros beach.
The left wing was immediately ripped off by contact with water while the right wing was quickly “dismembered” by deceleration and roll of the fuselage. Too much stress. Doesn’t take much. And encounters with steel? Lots of steel? How would wings fare there? You decide. By the way, NIST never gave the dimensions of the cut-outs in the towers; couldn’t because they were undersized, well short of the 155’ wingspan of a 767, especially the WTC2 hole. Measure the holes yourself, recalling that the 14” columns were on one meter centers. Like the Pentagon and Shanksville, every hole that day was too small to accommodate passage of the claimed Boeing aircraft.
In an effort to end this particular debate within our lifetimes, can everyone support an experiment proposed at www.911crashtest.org? Except Mr. Lawson who apparently believes in non-767 200 aircraft stronger than structural steel. In brief, the experiment would place a section of a 767 wing vertically on a rocket sled and accelerate it to 500+ mph, thereby crashing the wing section into a stationary, horizontally placed steel “wheatchex” identical to those that formed the perimeters of WTC 1&2. The sled of course would pass below the wheatchex and decelerate down the track. Naturally not everything would be identical to the alleged WTC crashes (no lateral floor edges, departures from right-angle/head-on impact, etc.) and there is room to debate experimental alternatives, but a simple crash test promises to prove quite a bit for or against the official WTC plane crash story and variations of it as advocated by “truthers” like those represented here.