Posted: Dec 11 2008
Simon Shack, like the good disinformation character he is, never retracts anything. So he brought the Verrazano Bridge back once again...Simon Shack wrote:I submit these pictures for the evaluation of all and sundry. As this topic has been seized by aspiring debunkers to 'thrash' September Clues, I'm well aware of the implications in me bringing it up once again. I will comment this with only brief captions, hoping that keen observers will dedicate a little time to form their own opinions about this oh-so-controversial matter.
He presents us these images:
And calls our attention for the proximity of the bridge pillar A and B in relation to the WTC towers.
I also want to call the attention for the fact that the pillar A goes to the position of the pillar B on the horizontal axis from one angle to another due to rotation.
This is in fact very important to keep in mind during this study!
And the different elevation of the chopper made the bridge apparently go up and down. Those differences can also be easily seen and explained on the vertical axis.
But then, for my surprise, he adds the following:
The problem is that Simon Shack isn't a real researcher. It seams that his role is to create chaos with unsupported claims never retracting any mistakes.Simon Shack wrote:Yes, the WTC has rotated, showing more of its West side. But by how many degrees ?
He tries to confuse everyone with unnecessary questions instead of giving answers. Avoiding every debate pretending he's a victim and pretending he's right.
If he was a real researcher he wouldn't be asking us how many degrees did the WTC rotate. He would try to find it himself and make his point!
So let's do all the work again just to prove Simon Shack wrong...
Notice how the 5 degrees space, represented in red, goes from one pillar to another on the Verrazano Bridge.
Which means that in a case of a 5 degrees rotation, the pillar A would be on the place of the pillar B.
This proves the accuracy of the 9/11 footage once again, showing that it was real and revealing how delusional the layering theory is.
The method used to test the bridge position and WTC rotation can be used by anyone, again and again, as many times Simon Shack brings the issue back.
Simon Shack is WRONG - but he won't retract...