Comments by "cchris874" (@cchris874) on "How is it possible 9/11 hijackers Passports survived the crash?" video.

  1. Yes, it's like tornadoes. They can inexplicably leave one house unscathed while destroying all the rest in the same path.
    8
  2. First off, paper items surviving high speed plane crashes is nothing new. Many examples can be cited. As to the fire, a lot depends on how long an item is exposed. If the hijacker had the passport, say, in his pocket and was seated in the cockpit, that that item has a head start, since the fuel tanks are behind it. And if the exposure is a fraction of a second, it could well escape complete destruction.
    7
  3. Who's kidding about what? The well established fact that paper items surviving high speed crashes is common place?
    6
  4.  @ResidentOfTheAbyss  You have no real science proving the collapse was impossible. Certainly nothing appearing in a science or engineering journal. So what is the evidence and where is it?
    4
  5.  @Dr.FirebladeSC59  Why would you carry a passport on a domestic flight? Especially back then when all you needed was a driver's license.
    4
  6. Don't know if they know. In 2001, passports would have been uncommon on domestic flights, I am guessing.
    4
  7.  @betajoshi  I never heard that. Do you have a source that hundreds of passports were found? Thanks
    4
  8. Because most US citizen's didn't fly with passports back then. I guess you forgot to connect that dot.
    3
  9. Not if she walked away.
    3
  10. These observations are valid to an extent, I agree. But IMHO an event of this magnitude and uniqueness is bound to result in numerous oddities and coincidences, government cover up or not. Whenever one digs deeply coincidences abound. Such as the New York state lottery number being 911 on Sep 11, 2002. With millions of interacting data points, some are bound to collide in a way that suggests human design. That may also be a part of our hardwiring- we tend to see agency behind everything. I just see that as the nature of reality. It continually outsmarts our common sense intuitions.
    3
  11.  @carrollsanders9376  But (many) truthers think it was impossible. Like ResidentOfTheAbyss. whom I was responding to.
    2
  12. It would make sense that not many passports were on the plane. Thus, if one were found, the odds would be much higher than average it would be one of the hijackers. Back then especially, few traveled with passports on domestic flights. "Only a passport." Wrong again. Lots of paper and debris were found on the streets and sidewalk. Not just a passport.
    2
  13.  @RicArmstrong  Oh no. that's bespeaks to a lack of research. The web is loaded with accounts of the 1st responders, some 1100 of them from 73 different agencies. You have not bothered to find even a single one???? They found 1500 body fragments from which the passengers IDs were made. The state trooper who found part of an engine in a catch basin; as mentioned, fuselage fragments, black boxes, engine core. Yes, you are right that in the first few moments, they could not find much debris. But within hours of combing the area, they found the cockpit in the trees, the body fragments, th strong stench of jet fuel was everywhere. You are a victim of selective evidence, and an inability to question your personal intuition and beliefs.
    2
  14. WRONG. Black boxes for both flight 93 and 77 were found. How difficult is it to get the basic facts right???
    2
  15.  @Racinrasslinfan36  Now that you've been called out on your mistakes, you understandably change the subject. Nice try.
    2
  16.  @owlhater270  I am, and it's far more enlightening than the three word bot replies of people who think they know everything; and that all the rest of us are blithering id-ots. This is the narcissist element of Youtube. I'm smarter than everyone else.
    1
  17.  @owlhater270  Not at all. I actually do my homework. For example I spoke to Brent Blanchard long before he became a mini celebrity, and he explained that gravity always explains the collapse speed of a CD. Did you know every time a body landed on the pavement it sounded like a bomb going off? It is Youtube truthers who routinely are lazy and can't lift a finger to do their own research. I highly recommend you watch the three part debate "Hardfire TONY SZAMBOTI / RYAN MACKEY / RONALD WIECK" If it doesn't show up on Youtube's search bar, use Google. In it, Mackey demonstrates complete mastery of subject, and explains why the collapses happened. cheers
    1
  18. Why is that? Paper surviving fiery plane crashes is nothing new. The real question is, where do you get this stuff from?
    1
  19. NO ONE SAID JET FUEL MELTS STEEL BESIDES TRUTHERS. Why do you guys keep repeating this lie over and over? No one ever accused the planes of "melting." Look, I know this is Youtube, where the quality is mediocre. But you have to at least put in SOME effort to know the basic claims.
    1
  20.  @gjustg1540  First retract the lie that anyone other than truthers claim the jet fuel melted steel. Otherwise you have no credibility.
    1
  21. We've already gone over this. They were crushed into tiny pieces. Again, why do you keep making the same mistake in your assumptions?
    1
  22.  @knockeledup  I was responding to this post "Where are passports of all other passengers from both planes?" Maybe you missed it due to Youtube's broken thread system, which they refuse to fix?
    1
  23. The passport was found before the collapses. Only a single passport was found at ground zero.
    1
  24. But it didn't survive the collapses because it was found before the collapses happened.
    1
  25.  @Larry26-f1w  They were crushed into small fragments. Why is that so mysterious?
    1
  26. Wrong, they collapsed due to the pull of gravity, just as is always the case with controlled demolition. That's why they look alike. Ask any CD expert, and they will confirm this for you.
    1
  27.  @Larry26-f1w  Oh yes, we have a troll convention every anniversary with Larry. And he keeps asking us when he thinks he might actually begin making a profit from his insurance policies, give that the payouts all fell far short of the costs in rebuilding the new trade center.
    1
  28.  @daveh4925  Everyone's different. Also, she gives it to the officer. And maybe there's no reporter in sight. Is she just supposed to wait there as the building is spewing debris? I would run away pretty quickly. wouldn't you?
    1
  29. You messed up bro. The paper stuff that survived was found OUTSIDE the building well before the collapses. You gotta know them facts first.
    1
  30.  @tomcrawford2054  I've certainly noticed, and lamented, YouTube's desire to purge what they consider to be 911 conspiracy mongering and therefore, false information. Even though I do not buy most of the arguments of the truth movement, I am totally outraged at the attempt to block what should be freedom of speech. Personally, I don't make too much more of it because this is part of the very recent broad trend by many media to try and play God with the public, as if there's an absolute object standard on every last issue. I think we are in agreement in disliking that. But that doesn't mean the motive is necessarily complicity with the government. It's IMO more cowardice, bowing to the left liberal extremist desperation to cater to every micro whine, every attempt to turn disagreement into "hate speech." For example this new trend to pretend we care about black people by insisting "black" should start with a capital B, but white remain small case w. That's so utterly insulting to basic civility. I noticed the BBC has not yet caught on to this. But I'm sure they will eventually follow suit.
    1
  31.  @jordangourley3955  There was indeed.
    1
  32.  @tomcrawford2054  Thanks. I have researched to death as well. I guess it just shows again how fascinating it is that we all see things so differently.
    1
  33.  @tomcrawford2054  And you too!
    1
  34. Willie Rodriguez is easy. You and he are making the unproven assumption that he actually heard the plane impact. But if you discard that unproven assertion, it becomes apparent he heard at last two of several explosions that happened after the plane impact., and simply ASSUMED one of those was the plane impact.
    1
  35. Garbage
    1
  36. No, it was found there, and there's no proof it wasn't.
    1
  37.  @wellifthemediasaysit  "theres no proof it wasnt' even mean?" If you're claim is that no one found the passport, you have to back that up with evidence. What is it? Why is your claim more credible?
    1
  38.  @sonofhibbs4425  Speaking of which, did you know that on 9/11 2002, the New York state winning lottery number was - you guessed it. 911
    1
  39.  @EternalEyeofRa  I can't answer that. I don't know how many coincidences we are necessarily talking about.
    1
  40.  @Larry26-f1w  You would not expect to find many intact bodies given the the fact they were crushed into tiny pieces for the most part.
    1
  41. That's just wrong.
    1
  42. Probably not. You should know that for months now, Youtube has some screwed up issues where comments disappear and then reappear. If you choose the sort by newest first option, at the beginning of the comments section, you will most likely see all of them. cheers
    1
  43. Oh yes it can. Water itself can cut through steel. There's a Youtube video showing this. There's another one showing a ping pall ball cutting a clean hole through a ping pong paddle. The physics is complex and depends on the speed of the object, as well as its rigidity. You can't make up physics in your head. The idea that you are smarter than the worldwide community of engineers and physicists is preposterous. I challenge you to take your claim to a university physics department and have then confirm your claim. But I bet, like the truth community in general, you couldn't be bothered to lift a finger to confirm the stuff you read, or spin out of thin air. Much easier to spout whatever junk you want on Youtube.
    1
  44.  @DTroop10thCav.  Wrong again. You are here referring to the specified design limits set by Boeing. But these are absolute minimum published limits, and aircraft frequently greatly exceed those limits. The proof comes in the form of planes that have exceeded those limits (such as Turkish Airlines flight 981,) as well as manufacturer routine testing: "During the test, the wings on the 787 were flexed upward approximately 25 feet which equates to 150 percent of the most extreme forces the airplane is ever expected to encounter during normal operation. The test is used to demonstrate a safety margin for the design and is part of the certification process to show the airplane can withstand extreme forces. Ultimate wing load testing is standard procedure for any new airplane design and has been done on aircraft large and small almost since the beginning of aviation. Often simple sandbags are placed on the wing of an aircraft to represent the maximum forces needed to be tested. Boeing and other large plane makers use elaborate testing structures (pictured above) that flex the wings to apply the necessary forces. In the past, Boeing has flexed the wing beyond the required 150 percent, and more than once the company has flexed the wings of a new design to the failure point. The most recent example was in 1995 with the 777." -Wired In other words, you're wrong.
    1
  45.  @DTroop10thCav.  "Do you know what damage a bird can do to the nose of an airplane?" Careful there. You're actually disproving your claim. A bird hitting a plane is analogous to an aluminum plane penetrating steel. In both cases, the lighter less dense object is causing damage to a much denser structure. Do you not understand that you just proved my argument?
    1
  46. "on those flights survived" Is your argument that they could not survive the impact, or that it survived but no one was looking to collect paper debris? BTW only one of the 4 passports was from the world trade center site.
    1
  47.  @supermanepic15  Yes, why do the truthers keep repeating these lies?
    1
  48. Paper surviving explosive plane crashes is nothing new. You need to know the facts before pontificating.
    1
  49. You're already off on the wrong foot. The black boxes were subject to the extreme crushing forces of the collapses. The passport was not. It shot OUT of the building BEFORE the collapses. Nice try.
    1
  50.  @Larry26-f1w  As usual, you offer no arguments and no facts.
    1
  51. I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but paper items surviving even fiery plane crashes is nothing new. It pays to do your homework before pontificating.
    1
  52.  @zariballard  But you have absolutely zero evidence to back up your one-liners.
    1
  53.  @h1F595  Tru-mp's lie of a stolen election is the most preposterous though.
    1
  54. Indeed. If traveling inside a hijacker's pocket inside the cockpit, all the more likely it might survive the inferno.
    1
  55. Why would the claim the passport was in the luggage "fit" his narrative? That does not make any sense. Why is it ridiculous the passport would be on his person inside the cockpit? Paper items surviving even very high speed plane crashes is a common place.
    1
  56. Counter which argument? That the passport did survive? Or could not have survived?
    1
  57.  @knockeledup  At these speeds there can be no doubt the plane began disintegrating instantly, and that most of it was in unrecognizable shreds within a second or two.
    1
  58.  @submerged8163  The passport was found before the buildings collapsed. So you are already off on the wrong foot.
    1
  59.  @SimonVu180  Hah. Most witnesses to the Pentagon crash ID'd it as an AA plane. Nice try.
    1