• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

9/11 No Planers who claim no planes struck the WTC, and think all the video is fake

I was standing on three blocks away (while on my way to 80 Johns St) on a corner with about 400 other people...many of whom had cell cameras, not mention the tourists who had real camera and camcorders. We were all jamming together to see. While I didnt see the first plane, I saw the second while watching what was happeing with the first tower hit.
A plane can not enter a dense steel framed structure. If you have seen one you need to look for answers in the colourful world of Jim Fetzer. He has laser projections and nuclear explosions and the whole thing was operated from a hidden base on the hidden side of the moon by Arthur C Clark. That's where the fun is.
 
Is it your contention that everyone who saw the planes hit the buildings then forgot they saw the planes hit the buildings and then remembered different, fake planes impact? That is the only way your idea works. How would you even make people forget the real planes and if you could why do that only to make them remember fake planes?

The flashy thing, of course. Twoofers think that the Men In Black was a documentary.
 
A plane can not enter a dense steel framed structure.

What about the Empire State Building plane crash in the 1940's? A plane entered a 'dense' steel structure. Or was that a practice run for 911 and the evil guv'ment fixed all the press cameras? One of the engines went straight through the building and crashed into the building next door. Are you going to say that this crash was a fake too?

http://history1900s.about.com/od/1940s/a/empirecrash.htm
 
A plane can not enter a dense steel framed structure. If you have seen one you need to look for answers in the colourful world of Jim Fetzer. He has laser projections and nuclear explosions and the whole thing was operated from a hidden base on the hidden side of the moon by Arthur C Clark. That's where the fun is.

But we know two planes entered the structures as a result of crashing into them. At some point, for reasons you haven't explained, the real planes then were replaced with CGI or something. Odd that, I mean adding a fake plane crash to a real plane crash.
 
A plane can not enter a dense steel framed structure. If you have seen one you need to look for answers in the colourful world of Jim Fetzer. He has laser projections and nuclear explosions and the whole thing was operated from a hidden base on the hidden side of the moon by Arthur C Clark. That's where the fun is.

You have proof that a plane cannot enter a dense steel framed structure? You have the physics to proof it. I know what I saw so, I can tell you, you're pissing into the wind and enjoying the taste.

Tell me something, how is it possible a pumpkin can penetrate both sides of heavy firberglass boat? (hint: physics)
 
Not intact, perhaps. How dense exactly was this steel structure? How did you calculate what ought to have happened? Where did you study engineering and physics?

It could't be denser and was filled with concrete. It had no way to run anywhere if hit by no matter what without taking the rest of the portion of the building with itself.

I don't calculate what will happen when I hit one of my fingers with a hammer. I just don't do it on purpose.
 
It could't be denser and was filled with concrete. It had no way to run anywhere if hit by no matter what without taking the rest of the portion of the building with itself.

I don't calculate what will happen when I hit one of my fingers with a hammer. I just don't do it on purpose.

All big buildings are filled with concrete? There would be no room for the people? Are you for real? I smell a poe pretending to be dumb. Here is a pic of a concrete filled building.

 
It could't be denser and was filled with concrete. It had no way to run anywhere if hit by no matter what without taking the rest of the portion of the building with itself.

I don't calculate what will happen when I hit one of my fingers with a hammer. I just don't do it on purpose.

It seems it would be more useful to discuss why the planes entered the buildings after they crashed into them. What with the planes entering the buildings after crashing into them and all.
 
It could't be denser and was filled with concrete. It had no way to run anywhere if hit by no matter what without taking the rest of the portion of the building with itself. I don't calculate what will happen when I hit one of my fingers with a hammer. I just don't do it on purpose.

That is not English. What are you trying to say? Do you expect a large fast moving object to collide with a building and dematerialize through the wall? The planes that crashed into the Twin Towers did take portions of the buildings with them, didn't you notice that or have you been watching crazy faked YooToob vids where no damage was done during the crashes?
 
You have proof that a plane cannot enter a dense steel framed structure? You have the physics to proof it. I know what I saw so, I can tell you, you're pissing into the wind and enjoying the taste.

Tell me something, how is it possible a pumpkin can penetrate both sides of heavy firberglass boat? (hint: physics)
A boat is comparable to the plane but a pumpkin is small. You need to keep ratios more or less.
 
The photo alone is enough to highlight fiction. The cut off floor section was part of the structure, with the buildings centre and another floor system behind it and walls. When hit the floors had nowhere to escape. In the photo they are missing. If the clowns were smarter they could have made it look a bit more realistic like displaced and deformed trusses sticking out that sort of stuff. You have to make sure the photos you show pose a bit of a challenge if you want to play. Supposedly and object weighting say 5 xtimes of a Boeing and flying at 5000 mph should enter and penetrate through the windows. It could damage walls, and the floors to an extend. Most of this energy would escape throughout the building along the path of little resistance, turning it to an expanding bomb. Build a small replica of the towers and hit it with something even more compact than an airplane, like a a bullet. Keep size ratios within reason. Try to achieve a similar result as yyour photo shows. I will nominate you for the Nobel prize in physics if you do.

Reality in the extreme doesn't always look real.

Esp. if you don't have the knowledge to understand what you're seeing.
 
A boat is comparable to the plane but a pumpkin is small. You need to keep ratios more or less.

Where did you study dimensional analysis and why am I suddenly reminded of Father Ted?

What percentage of the volume of the twin towers was filled with concrete? What percentage of the volume was steel?
 
Last edited:
A plane can not enter a dense steel framed structure. If you have seen one you need to look for answers in the colourful world of Jim Fetzer. He has laser projections and nuclear explosions and the whole thing was operated from a hidden base on the hidden side of the moon by Arthur C Clark. That's where the fun is.

It didn't.
 
A boat is comparable to the plane but a pumpkin is small. You need to keep ratios more or less.

Excuse me???? What does the ratio have to do with it? What is your education level regarding physics?

Why aren't the architects of the WTC exposing the fraud of the events of 9/11?
 
Last edited:
That is not English. What are you trying to say? Do you expect a large fast moving object to collide with a building and dematerialize through the wall? The planes that crashed into the Twin Towers did take portions of the buildings with them, didn't you notice that or have you been watching crazy faked YooToob vids where no damage was done during the crashes?

Why would anyone honest want to fake faked videos? I would imagine there are plenty faked fakes on you tube. I am sure we both can agree on the answer.
 

Back
Top Bottom