Quote:
Originally Posted by dyna mo
typical. you cannot have it both ways.
and this is generally how truthers argue the issue. 1st they (you) say one thing, then when proof is shown, it's a quick backtrack or sidetrack.
|
Nope.. not backtracking..
I'm saying it was no 757 that hit.. Had it been, the engines would have broken loose on impact and would have slammed through the bldg.; creating 2 more holes, or the single hole that was made would have been much larger.. or they would have hit the bldg. and left all sorts of pieces & parts at their impact points. Neither was the case..
As for the proof shown.. I said that it lends more to support the argument against it being a 757.
Think about the size of the hole.. then the size of the plane.. Flying fast enough to allow a 150+ ft. fuselage to disappear completely into the bldg.... through a number of re-enforced walls, but apparently not fast enough for 2, 6 ton engines to leave as much as a mark on the wall..