Really appreciate your work. I original found you through all the comments you left on the A&E 911 truth odysee channel, where you would ask a number of questions that the controlled demo theory didn't account for. Do you have that list written down somewhere in Substack that we could use as a reference for others?
Once you have read the book cover to cover and take ownership of the information contained therein you too will be able to ask the questions I am asking :-) https://www.wheredidthetowersgo.com/
What would be the best steel-man argument that these cars burned by (rather ignited by) normal means. How would you build a case for that? Curious what people come back with when presented with the car footage.
I'm with you there, and follow the line of reasoning. But you didn't answer my question, I asked you to steel-man the opposing side. How would you do it, in light of the evidence?
4. Does iron microspheres cause whole engine blocks to disappear, glass too?
Did you watch the 1h slideshow I added to the article?
The other side plays on belief and have no evidence for what they believe happened...
You even have the same "toasted" cars in part of the sub basements below the towers, but A LOT of the cars weren't damaged and they were driven out from where they were parked - see my basement article for more detail.
Oct 24, 2023·edited Oct 24, 2023Liked by 9/11 Revisionist
I did watch the 1hr slideshow, and have followed your work for over a year. You've already convinced me that there are a lot of weird things that happened on 9/11 that aren't explained by the controlled demo, nuke, or "official" narratives.
I'm trying to give the benefit of the doubt to the person who isn't manufacturing the controlled-demo narrative, but is in that camp. I'm starting from the point that they are not dumb people, just have rationalized a certain set of facts/data (perhaps to the exclusion of other points --- its really hard to give an elevator pitch about all this, because its such a vast web).
the best steel-man I can come up with is something like this
- yes, there were many vehicles that burned. But, since NYC is so large, 1,400 vehicles is like 5% of the total vehicles in that part of the city, so its not really that many
- the ignition source must have been in the dust /debris cloud. A small percentage of the cloud must have been fire embers (or potentially a source of static electricity) which made its way into engine intake of running vehicles, and from there ignited the gas.
- the static electricity route could explain why people didn't have major burns walking through it.
- there are examples of car parking lots where one car catches fire, and then spreads to others, so the Embassy Hotel parking lot isn't that much of an anomaly
I understand that the above takes a lot of faith to believe. It can't be tested, since we don't have the cloud to test now. But, i wouldn't call someone dumb for thinking that, if all they are shown is pictures of burned out cars.
Toasted cars are my favorite 9/11 anomaly. We should be examining the cars in Lahaina, Maui closely!
It's certainly going to be good to compare and contrast the two.
Here is an hour's worth of pictures of the toasted cars at WTC - https://odysee.com/@911revisited:7/Toasted-mega-mix-resized:6
I made a video on the parallels between maui and 9/11 and collected some footage of the toasted cars
https://odysee.com/@911revisited:7/Maui-and-911_2:4
Indeed, an epic video you put together.
Here it is on Rumble as well: https://rumble.com/v4fb2ch-maui-2023-and-september-2001.html
where can i find these fantastic video's?
You can visit my Odysee channel and then just search the term "toasted cars" under the content tab.
Here is a video I uploaded yesterday: https://odysee.com/@911revisited:7/Toasted-mega-mix-resized:6
Really appreciate your work. I original found you through all the comments you left on the A&E 911 truth odysee channel, where you would ask a number of questions that the controlled demo theory didn't account for. Do you have that list written down somewhere in Substack that we could use as a reference for others?
Once you have read the book cover to cover and take ownership of the information contained therein you too will be able to ask the questions I am asking :-) https://www.wheredidthetowersgo.com/
Then watch this short clip: https://odysee.com/@911revisited:7/Richard-does-not-know:0
Read this article: https://elsaiselsa.substack.com/p/dr-judy-wood-refutation-of-gages-game
And Dr Wood's response: https://truthsummit.info/media-files/DrJudyWood-refutation-RichardGage-claims.pdf
What would be the best steel-man argument that these cars burned by (rather ignited by) normal means. How would you build a case for that? Curious what people come back with when presented with the car footage.
You saw the cars in the car park that was blocks away?
Then what causes Scott bottles and oxygen tanks and cars to spontaneously combust, whilst no paper burns?
Here, give this a listen: https://odysee.com/@911revisited:7/Toasted-cars-and-the-so-called-heat-:1
I'm with you there, and follow the line of reasoning. But you didn't answer my question, I asked you to steel-man the opposing side. How would you do it, in light of the evidence?
There is no steel-man for the opposing side.
1. The dust cloud was cold (did the people burn?)
2. Did the paper between the cars burn?
3. Did the survivors in stairwell B burn?
4. Does iron microspheres cause whole engine blocks to disappear, glass too?
Did you watch the 1h slideshow I added to the article?
The other side plays on belief and have no evidence for what they believe happened...
You even have the same "toasted" cars in part of the sub basements below the towers, but A LOT of the cars weren't damaged and they were driven out from where they were parked - see my basement article for more detail.
The other side bet on the fact you won't look at what evidence Dr Wood presents in her book: https://www.wheredidthetowersgo.com/
More on the "toasted cars" on pages 213 to 247
I did watch the 1hr slideshow, and have followed your work for over a year. You've already convinced me that there are a lot of weird things that happened on 9/11 that aren't explained by the controlled demo, nuke, or "official" narratives.
I'm trying to give the benefit of the doubt to the person who isn't manufacturing the controlled-demo narrative, but is in that camp. I'm starting from the point that they are not dumb people, just have rationalized a certain set of facts/data (perhaps to the exclusion of other points --- its really hard to give an elevator pitch about all this, because its such a vast web).
the best steel-man I can come up with is something like this
- yes, there were many vehicles that burned. But, since NYC is so large, 1,400 vehicles is like 5% of the total vehicles in that part of the city, so its not really that many
- the ignition source must have been in the dust /debris cloud. A small percentage of the cloud must have been fire embers (or potentially a source of static electricity) which made its way into engine intake of running vehicles, and from there ignited the gas.
- the static electricity route could explain why people didn't have major burns walking through it.
- there are examples of car parking lots where one car catches fire, and then spreads to others, so the Embassy Hotel parking lot isn't that much of an anomaly
I understand that the above takes a lot of faith to believe. It can't be tested, since we don't have the cloud to test now. But, i wouldn't call someone dumb for thinking that, if all they are shown is pictures of burned out cars.