VIDEO: Large Airliners Did NOT Hit the Twin Towers on 9/11!

reply to post by dereks


Well those are the 'official' dates....

If you look hard enough dereks, you will find that the aircraft officially achieved IOC in half the average time of similar projects.

That clue is for free.

The important thing to take away from this discussion is that the official story contradicts Newtonian Physics. It comes down to who do you trust: George W or Isaac Newton. I feel that planes or no planes is a distraction. Nano thermite or particle beam weapon or Hutchison effect is a distraction.
Dr. Wood makes some good and bad points. It is hard to explain the cars at some distance being roasted from the inside out. Her claim that the pile of debris not being high enough and material being vaporized is a stretch. Her credibility is stretched by claiming weapons that may or may not exist did the job.
September Clues makes a very interesting case for a no plane theory. The nose through the other side of the building. The discoloration of various video clips, blacking out of frames etc.
Whatever theory you subscribe to we all agree that these buildings were not brought down by gravity alone. I think this is something we can all rally behind in calling for a new non political investigation. We should focus on what we agree on rather than promote division among ourselves with the things we cannot agree on.

When you say that something is "OBVIOUS", then you're stating that its easily seen or grasped... In this case, it's NOT obvious to me because of all the evidence to the contrary. I would sooner believe that aliens caused the planes to crash into the building that that there was no crash at all.

reply to post by FlySolo


IDK, that last one looks like typical NYC vandalism.

Originally posted by cayrichard
The important thing to take away from this discussion is that the official story contradicts Newtonian Physics. It comes down to who do you trust: George W or Isaac Newton. I feel that planes or no planes is a distraction. Nano thermite or particle beam weapon or Hutchison effect is a distraction.
Dr. Wood makes some good and bad points. It is hard to explain the cars at some distance being roasted from the inside out. Her claim that the pile of debris not being high enough and material being vaporized is a stretch. Her credibility is stretched by claiming weapons that may or may not exist did the job.
September Clues makes a very interesting case for a no plane theory. The nose through the other side of the building. The discoloration of various video clips, blacking out of frames etc.
Whatever theory you subscribe to we all agree that these buildings were not brought down by gravity alone. I think this is something we can all rally behind in calling for a new non political investigation. We should focus on what we agree on rather than promote division among ourselves with the things we cannot agree on.

Hi Cay,
I agree with you the first few lines, and there is no doubt in my mind that 'planes were involved. As for the rest, I don't feel that those ideas are a distraction, because what you have is an extraordinary event, or chain of events, and for which there has to be an answer. You could say, for instance that much of the concrete, and astbestos and gypsum or all the organic and mineral stuff did vapourise however it was caused. The TV footage was most likely manipulated or played about with, once in a studio down the line, as the pictures we saw from the bigger networks were borrowed and second hand, and most were not so good in the first instance. Just keep looking and asking questions, and don't discount anything first off.

www.fas.org... I like this article on Particle beam weapons, It seems to cover, especially things you have queries about, and the article is old.

Originally posted by sodakota
Why would the moderators mark this thread as a hoax?

That would make the moderators appear "biased"

Just because half the members believe in UFO's and the other half doesn't, are they going to delete all the UFO threads?

There's no reason why we can't discuss this. It needs to be discussed. Discussing it does not make a person ignorant. It makes them curious.

The third time my question was ignored it should of ended up in the hoax section BECAUSEEEE,What happened to the so called people that was suppose to be in the exotic filming HD in your face while on the ground looking right at the computer sized planes HIT THE BUILDING.

Thats all i ever wanted to know, can some one answer that, if u can answer that then by all means the computerized what ever theory will THEN be plasable.

what happened to the people that died?
where did they go?
Was they computer anamated as well?
What about the family of the people that so called died?
was they part of the matrix as well.

lol,in this theory didnt u ever concider,what happened to the people.lol...im out.

Originally posted by Immortalgemini527

Originally posted by sodakota
Why would the moderators mark this thread as a hoax?

That would make the moderators appear "biased"

Just because half the members believe in UFO's and the other half doesn't, are they going to delete all the UFO threads?

There's no reason why we can't discuss this. It needs to be discussed. Discussing it does not make a person ignorant. It makes them curious.

The third time my question was ignored it should of ended up in the hoax section BECAUSEEEE,What happened to the so called people that was suppose to be in the exotic filming HD in your face while on the ground looking right at the computer sized planes HIT THE BUILDING.

Thats all i ever wanted to know, can some one answer that, if u can answer that then by all means the computerized what ever theory will THEN be plasable.

what happened to the people that died?
where did they go?
Was they computer anamated as well?
What about the family of the people that so called died?
was they part of the matrix as well.

lol,in this theory didnt u ever concider,what happened to the people.lol...im out.

edit on 25-9-2010 by Immortalgemini527 because: (no reason given)

ARE U SERIOUS PEOPLE ?

Originally posted by PookztA
I cannot believe people still even debate this issue...

Then take your own advice and don't.

People who are convinced that the gubberment did it, and now apparently that the airliners weren't even there, will never be ousted from those opinions. They will spend the rest of their lives living like perpetual religious missionaries trying with ceaseless and often maniacal energy to convince the world that it was all either faked on a sound stage in the New Mexico desert, an inside job to get us more oil, or that the "Jewes done it".

So how about pretending that we all believe you, and then we don't have to debate the same tired old crap that has been proven to be utter garbage a hundred times over by people with scientific degrees and no anti-government agenda.

reply to post by Immortalgemini527


Now keep this thread running and do your home work only ..and only,the last plane that was bladently shot down.
Talk about building 7.
Even talk about the bombs that was heared by people and all that.
It happened and it happened in front of millions of people on tv and hundreds of people on the ground.
EYE WITNESSES
VIDEOS WITH ALL THE SAME FACTS.
In this world ,u cannot ask for better evidence then was has been presented in this case AS FAR AS THE PLANES WAS COMPUTERIZED..NOOO

Building 7,the last airliner and why and how was it possible that theses... Primitive age humans could infiltrate the usa..With the OBVIOUS help that was so needed in side .
[ JUST THAT ONE INSIDE HELP INSIDE THE USA THAT WASNT OF ARABIC BLOOD ] TALK ABOUT THAT.

Originally posted by Ciphor

Originally posted by ChemBreather
I see no wings here...
No disturbence on the building either, yet the object seems to be solid .. I may be way off here, but..
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/8225389f641a.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/4192ef19f935.jpg[/atsimg]

Hope it isnt too big..(It was, had to Crop )

edit on 18/9/2010 by ChemBreather because: (no reason given)

One question.

Can you please provide evidence to show these images have not been altered in any way

Thank you.

Even if the clip were "altered", the point is that, ALTERING works BOTH ways... or did you forget to THINK about that?

why is it so hard to believe what that video is showing, but not so many other dodgy vids including everything fed to by the MSM? So please provide evidence that ALL the footage you believe proves flight 11 and 175 hit the wtc, haven't been altered/tampered/edited etc.

but you know the funniest part of your argument, is that you're crying forgery/fake upon a video that was among many USED to SELL the RPT.

the saddest part is you didn't know that

Originally posted by seagull
So, all those pictures of the "planes" hitting the towers were faked. All the eyewitness accounts, including one in this very thread, say they saw planes hit the towers...I'm inclined to believe them.

That's all fake. Ok, fine. How was it done, then? Energy weapons have been hypothesized. The towers were wired, by person/persons unknown, for demolition.

Ok, OP'er, let's hear/read your evidence. Your thoughts on the deal. Not someone elses. Let's see something vaguely resembling proof that it wasn't airplanes and that all those people who actually saw these airplanes hit are either liars, or delusional...

...and I'm sorry if I don't consider youtube videos to be ironclad evidence.

you say clips from REAL/ACTUAL FOOTAGE aren't good enough.

So what do you consider "ironclad" seagull? or iow, what "evidence" are you using as proof flight 11 and 175 hit the wtc's?

witnesses? "OCT"?

you can't ignore the FACT there's TONS of the same type of "credible" counter-evidence that supports the NRPT and answers very well each of the points above you cite.

and there's a valid post explaining why its more than fair to question the poster CLAIMING to have seen a plane hit.

Hi,

A point I would like to make, which seems to be consistently ignored in most arguments is from the Boeing company itself. It is regarding the "harmonic resonance" of the planes at speed, and the thickness of the actual air mass at different altitudes. It appears that when a large plane like that is traveling at cruising speed 500 +/- mph, that plane needs to be at a high altitude as the air mass is too thick and causes the plane to vibrate apart. Appearantly the air is much much thinner at cruising altitude, which in turn allows for the higher speeds.

Now I am in no way a Boeing engineer, and the video I saw is suspiciously absent from your tube, hopefully if someone else saw it they may be able to link to it. If I can find it, I'll link to it as well.

..Ex

If large airliners did not hit the Twin Towers, then U.S. military aircraft hit the towers.



E-10 JSTARS



E-8 JSTARS

Witnesses reported seeing a plane with a belly mounted pod crashing into the North Tower.

Originally posted by ironfalcon
If large airliners did not hit the Twin Towers, then U.S. military aircraft hit the towers.



E-10 JSTARS



E-8 JSTARS

Witnesses reported seeing a plane with a belly mounted pod crashing into the North Tower.

Interesting point about witnesses. I saw a u tube video, which had since been taken down that showed 2 groups of people, white shirts and black shirts, passing a basketball. The challenge was to count the number of times the white shirt team passed the ball. I watched this video many times, and counted the white team passing the ball 11 times. Now the purpose of the video was to show that a person dressed in a ape suit could walk through the center of the video without notice by the person watching the video. Seems that these very useful videos keep vanishing..

The point to this is diversion. If the PTB can divert your attention, they can do anything. I'm sure that the real people behind the whole thing are rolling around laughing at the farce they pulled over the eyes of the world. The scary part is that now they have been successful with this, what might be coming down the pipe?

..Ex

Originally posted by v3_exceed

Originally posted by ironfalcon
If large airliners did not hit the Twin Towers, then U.S. military aircraft hit the towers.



E-10 JSTARS



E-8 JSTARS

Witnesses reported seeing a plane with a belly mounted pod crashing into the North Tower.

Interesting point about witnesses. I saw a u tube video, which had since been taken down that showed 2 groups of people, white shirts and black shirts, passing a basketball. The challenge was to count the number of times the white shirt team passed the ball. I watched this video many times, and counted the white team passing the ball 11 times. Now the purpose of the video was to show that a person dressed in a ape suit could walk through the center of the video without notice by the person watching the video. Seems that these very useful videos keep vanishing..

The point to this is diversion. If the PTB can divert your attention, they can do anything. I'm sure that the real people behind the whole thing are rolling around laughing at the farce they pulled over the eyes of the world. The scary part is that now they have been successful with this, what might be coming down the pipe?

..Ex

edit on 9/27/2010 by v3_exceed because: edit for speling

How about War with Iran and a nuclear conflict to further seal the perps/illuminati new world order agenda...

Thats why the TRUTH of 911 is so important and cannot be brushed off, forgotten and ignored... The people of the world need to wake up or rise up to prevent whats "in the pipe", however unfortunately i'm afraid its far too late now to prevent whats been set in motion.

The same group of Perps are plotting the next 911 in which nukes will most likely be a part of... sadly the importance will only be realized when millions are vaporized in an instant.

So When Israel / USA attack Iran shortly, the conflict begins, and Israel will be the first casualty of nuke terrorism.

reply to post by ironfalcon


Oh, not this crap again!!!???!!!

The "E-10"???

Do you mean the PROPOSED version (variation on the Boeing 767-400 platform) that was JUST A CONCEPT in 2003???? 2003!!!

AND....the contract was never fulfilled, to build the fleet (yet). Except for ONE demonstration airplane (which, BTW, still exists).

But, did I mention that the concept develepment wasn't even begun until 2003!!

en.wikipedia.org...

(This ties in to the controversy over the replacement airplane choice for the KC-135 tanker fleet. Was going to be Boeing, based on the 767; but some under-the-table shenanigans were uncovered, and Airbus is getting another shot at bidding the contract. It is STILL unsettled, even today.....).


And, the E-8???? Are you serious?? It has FOUR engines!!!! :shk:

Honest, I am so saddened by this, the continued nonsense that we see on this topic.

AND, there were NO "PODS" on the United AIrlines Boeing 767-200! Hasn't this fact already been posted (probably multiple times) in this very thread???


This (like just about EVERY "9/11 conspiracy") is yet another example of people (not the ATS member specifically, he/she is likely just a messenger) who do NOT know bleep about what they're talking about, going out and TALKING about bleep they know nothing about.

reply to post by ironfalcon


I always wondered if "truthers" like ironfalcon are screen names created by the Osers to make the real truthers look bad. notice how some of the OSers are having a field day with ironfalcon...

reply to post by Orion7911


oh god somebody in that photo tried using the healing brush on photoshop and failed.

Where is my brick wall emoticon when I need it? You know where the smiley face bangs his head against the wall so many times?

Originally posted by dragnet53
reply to post by Orion7911

 

oh god somebody in that photo tried using the healing brush on photoshop and failed.

Where is my brick wall emoticon when I need it? You know where the smiley face bangs his head against the wall so many times?

o

well mate, if you did some real research, you might know there's two clips out "there"...

the original and the re-edit someone did admitting they used photoshop to show how such video can be easily manipulated.

now the above gif is from the ORIGINAL... or IOW, in case you haven't done any real research (cough), nothing was altered... another detail you might not know is the author of that video is Luc Courchesne, yet another coincidental professional video photographer lucky enough to have actually been in the right place at the right time (LOL).

now lets see if you can figure out what the implications of all that might mean ...

hint: the ORIGINAL contains a cgi insert

reply to post by Orion7911


What kind of veiled innuendo is meant by this?:

...another detail you might not know is the author of that video is Luc Courchesne, yet another coincidental professional video photographer lucky enough to have actually been in the right place at the right time (LOL).

It isn't difficult, in today's Google era, to search for the man's name, and discover his details.

French-Canadian, Montreal-based artist. What is so unusual for a fairly well-known artist to be in New York City???

His Wiki Bio, in French

Wiki has a translate function. I snipped this segment from the English version:

On September 11, 2001, when he was in New York as part of the cultural event "Quebec-New York," he was filming the north tower of World Trade Center struck earlier by a Boeing 767, when Boeing came the second hit the south tower. The video, lasting 23 minutes, is available in the archives of Radio-Canada .

AND, also found 11 mintues of it (YouTube). Funny, filming has already begun AFTER American11 hit....and the focus of attention for MANY many people and their cameras was already directed towards the WTC Towers.

Oddly, he doesn't seem to have a very high-quality camera, at the time of the filming....since you "hinted" that it was such a "lucky" thing that he was there on that day??



(Oh, and BTW --- those who speak French will be better able to follow the comments, in the soundtrack, as people casually discuss what they're seeing. My French is very weak, but when I take my time I can catch most of it).

It is puzzling, this continued spread of disinformation, regarding the airplanes on 9/11.

What purpose does it serve?