It all good. Maybe I what I am asking is unreasonable, But, I don't think it's an unreasonable request. People think 911 was an inside job. Some think that the WTCs where brought down by explosives, remote controlled planes, and the pentagon was hit by a missle. If thats the case, then what evidence leads them to that conclusion? And how does the evidence lend into an overall picture of what happened that day? I would think that if there is enough evidence to conclude it was an inside job at the every least there should be some sort of picture or sequence of events that could be drawn.
Like for example what happen to the flight that didnt hit the pentagon, from start to finish. The NIST used evidence to paint a story why can't CT'ers. Do the same if it's so obvious a plane didnt hit it?
I am sure evidence can be provided or arguments can be brought up that even skeptics can't argue to well. If so what are they? For me, lots of it is a matter or weight and volume. The volume of evidence for a plane hitting the pentagon far outweighs the evidence that a missle hit it. So if a missle hit it, what I am asking some one to do is make a real case. Start to finish. Tell the story in detail of what likely happened that day and use the available evidence to support it.
Then what evidence presented is valid or not? What can or cannot be dismissed? Like the flashes on the video NT insinuated were explosions, but the same flashes could be seen in mid air looked more like video noise or reflections from glass or metal. Not to mention the fact that a grainy video isn't at all conclusive or even practical to determining explosions where planted in advance.
Another good example would be the government knowing it was going to happen but not doing anything. The whistle blowers articles support that theory much better than the evidence used to conclude a missle hit the pentagon.
It's kind of like reversing sides. The NIST reports the official story and CTers find problems with it. Well if the CTer case is that strong then it should be able to switch places with the NIST case and stand up to similar scrutiny shouldn't it? If not then how could the CTer case be that strong if at all?