It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


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

page: 8
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in


posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 11:46 PM
reply to post by Asktheanimals

sound travels at @1000 feet per second.
a plane travelling at 500 mph is doing @750 fps
the sound would traven @ 250 fps faster than the plane at sea level.

the reason a jet at 35,000 appear visually like it is seven
miles in front or its sound is that the sound has to travel
@ seven miles from space to hit the earth/ear drum.

so people would have heard the planes and reacted
to the noise BEFORE they react to the sight.

posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 11:57 PM
This whole no planers theory is complete crap, just pure black propaganda..was there a plane was there not a plane, what about the people on board that died?

posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 12:00 AM
I did not read all the posts and apologize if this has already been mentioned but people did hear and see the planes hit the buildings. I know one. The 9-11 fest last week showed plenty of home videos that had both the impact and/or screaming sound of the planes from several vantage points as well as the audio reaction of viewers as they filmed while talking on the phone. I realize what website I am on but it is impossible for this to be explained as some sort of coordinated mass hypnosis cover up. I had a professor who introduced me to the questionable validity of the eye witness account by having a person run into the lecture hall and take a book. 100+ students then had to answer a questions regarding the appearance of the man. No 2 people saw the same thing. The point was obvious. The 9-11 event is different. This was 2 planes hitting buildings in broad daylight in front of thousands of people. If you see a car accident you might miss who pulled out in front of who or the color of the cars but you know you saw car accident. We don't know how many shooters there were in Dallas but there is no question President Kennedy was shot and killed. This type of argument reminds me of the video I saw stating as fact that all Jews knew 9-11 was going to happen and did not show up for work. Ridiculous. It is also very clear that the impact of the planes and collapse of the buildings caused the collapse of WTC7. Don't listen to me...ask an engineer.

posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 12:07 AM
People can believe there were planes and people can believe there were no planes. This debate will probably rage on for years.

However, I think we can all agree (at least those with triple digit IQ's), something just isn't right with the news footage that day. You have reporters on the scene saying there were no planes, just explosions. Then you have some say a plane hit.

Well we know that it wasn't 19 hijackers (mainly because 6 are still alive) that did this. The people who perpetrated this crime against 3000+ people *really* did their homework and were VERY prepared for the aftermath. They threw all kinds of confusion in to the mix thanks to their media plants and that guy on the street who sounded like an infomercial host.

edit on 19-9-2010 by Roid_Rage27 because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 12:08 AM

Originally posted by Fermi
It is also very clear that the impact of the planes and collapse of the buildings caused the collapse of WTC7. Don't listen to me...ask an engineer.

I don't know where you are getting your information..

Ask an Engineer? How about 1306 verified architectural and engineering professionals...

posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 12:24 AM
To save you anymore grief,
go to the last post on this site.

mini-nukes and the whole story, no planes phony footage. no plane at pentagon, U.S. missile

edit on 19-9-2010 by canadiansenior70 because: add http

posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 12:45 AM
I'll start with the same sentence as the "op." I can't believe how stupid people can be when it comes to the things they would believe. If any of you feel like your goverment had any thing to do with 9/11 heres what you do. Buy a plane ticket and leave, go anywhere you want, but just leave now. We don't want you here, nor do we need you here in America. Understand that you have severe mentall issues, and need medical help.

posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 12:47 AM
reply to post by PookztA

If Large Airliners did not hit the Twin Towers, then Prey Tell what did.

Was it a Giant Rubber Plane with Giant speakers and stuffed with Explosive.
Well that can''t be right, because it would still be a Large Plane

Maybe it was Mirrors

Who actually gains from keeping the Conspiracy Theries Alive....
I do believe it is all those Publishers with Books , Movies, TV Shows.
This is massive money maker.

posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 12:55 AM
There are many things wrong with this analysis, such as then end, when it is suggested that the "nose" of the aircraft comes out the other side of the building. In fact, due to the speed of these planes, the kinetic energy would surely drive the explosion in and through, not only allowing the whole aircraft to enter the building before exploding, but also driving it through the building like a projectile.

Furthermore, the premise that the various media outlets all switched to "convenient" angles just before impact (as to not show the actual impact) is kind of defeated by FOX, who seems to capture a real good angle of the aircraft striking the building.

As far as the "diving aircraft", it is extremely hard to ascertain how far that aircraft is when it is diving. The aircraft had to lose altitude in order to hit that building and so that's what that was. It wasn't really a nose dive so much as a descent at high speed.

I find this video faulty on several occasions and it saddens me that these wild claims are out there, as it gives the entire movement a bad name and the debunkers and easy "cop-out". We would all be much better off, if only we concentrated on proving the OS wrong (as opposed to what could have happened) in order to get a new and truly independent investigation.


posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 01:16 AM

Again this video is important
1. people are looking into the skies and not noticing any plane until the bomb sound around 29 mark in the video
2. most plane witness were TV reporters and only few talked with the public witness and these witness were government workers

Another important to remember.
The media news networks all gathered in new york city before and during the moments before 9/11
The media have the most knowledge on what really happened.

You really expect me to believe this photo of this plane is real?
Looks pretty edited look closer
compered to other photos of the plane did not match.

I thought ATS was uncovering Government secrets not attacking other members of the truth movement.

edit on 19-9-2010 by Agent_USA_Supporter because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 01:37 AM

Originally posted by slugger9787
so people would have heard the planes and reacted
to the noise BEFORE they react to the sight.

I think you have that wrong.

Light travels faster than sound. People will always see before they hear.

posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 01:47 AM
Great post! I'm glad to see many people questioning the official fairy tale. We know the government lied about JFK, they lie to you about Chemtrails, they lied to you about the Gulf Oil Spill and they lied to you about 911!

Here's evidence that micro nukes were used also which the evidence clearly shows.

Look up in the dictionary what the definition of "ground zero" is - the point directly above or below a nuclear explosion. They didn't call it "ground zero" for nothing! Tritium levels at 55x normal and all the melted cars and melted steel in the basements tell the tale. Watch all Dimitri Khalezov's videos. He's done some really fine work on this and his videos have been taken off Youtube repeatedly. Go see what "they" don't want you to see. And don't listen to any "expert" that tells you it's impossible. Go look at the evidence. the original demolition plan for all 3 of the buildings were nuclear demolition by small micro nukes under their foundations. Controlled Demolition Inc got the patent for this plan for the Twin towers and the Russians were notified of this plan by treaty in the 70's. The Russians had a big laugh about the crazy Americans that were going to someday take down the buildings by nuclear demolition.

Nuclear demolition was the original plan and was a part of the plan. I believe they also used some conventional and termite too to cover all their basis to make sure it went down as neatly as possible. But the micro nukes under the foundations were the reason that the pile of towers were so small because so much of the steel and concrete were turned to dust by the "crush zone" of the nuclear compression wave.

posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 03:21 AM
If planes did not hit the towers, then how were they able to analyze pieces of body parts and identify bodies that were on those planes? How did the people on those planes call their families when they were still in flight, and leave messages or speak with family members? I realize there are times when you can be tricked by what is in front of your eyes, but in this case I really do believe that planes hit the towers. The things that I have questioned for years is controlled demolition, the flight 93 crash, and the pentagon plane.

edit on 19-9-2010 by Thunder heart woman because: spelling

posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 04:03 AM

Originally posted by SeventhSeal
Many loved ones of mine did in fact see a plane crash into the second building. Oh and yeah, hundreds of amateur videos were also CGI, right?

100's of amatuer video? Where? I have seen, I dunno, 20 off the top of my head, maxinum. 100's though? That seems a bit too much really.
And all I'm saying is if someone saw something hit the tower, now knowing what it was, then they're told "A plane hit the tower", then even if they didn't know that originally that's what they're going to go on and assume from there on. I mean I still believe a plane hit, but I can't know, I wasn't there, and some of the evidence in the OP does bring new light to a few things, and a lot of it is just garbage. But all I' saying is that if I saw soomething for example in the corner of my eye hit a building and I didn't know what it was, but later someone told me it was a plane, I'm gonna say I saw a plane hit the building, even If I don't know that for sure.

posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 04:21 AM

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

Um, yes they did!

You know you and the 52 other "stars" must keep forgetting that some people were actually on the ground in NYC that day and saw what you people can't or refuse to. And it was way more than 52. Is it just a way too keep these asinine theorys floating by posting the same threads over and over and over again until it becomes lodged in people's mind to the point that well hey, it gotta be true then!

Two planes hit the WTC Towers that day. No doubt at all. Moving on now......

posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 04:36 AM

Originally posted by Tempest333
reply to post by Ciphor

Does anyone else see the shadow of an airplane on the building? I do.
And I took the pics and zoomed in to pixel-level and my thoughts on it is YES, it was tampered with, albeit pretty well done.

Your welcome.


edit on 18-9-2010 by Tempest333 because: Those look like wings in the shadow to me!!!!

I dont think it lines up with the shadow of the building on the left side in the picture though..
And you see shadow on both sides of the tip/front on the plane, for that to happend there must be an light source on both sides of the planes.
And to you others: Glad to make you all laught !! Great stuff..

edit on 19/9/2010 by ChemBreather because: aded some comments..

posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 05:15 AM
52 Flags!!!!!!!! What the hell is wrong with you 52 people, many different independent videos and photos and hundreds and hundreds of different witnesses saw the planes, you 52 people are dumb, very dumb

posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 05:19 AM
I'm sure there are "truthers" that come up with these wacky ideas that haven't been thought out properly to damage any real evidence of an inside job. It's hard for me to argue with someone who believes in the OS when you see ridiculous theories like this. Is it any wonder that truthers are given little credibility?

posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 05:31 AM
can you explain the debris on the ground

posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 05:35 AM
Why would the government risk such a scenario, fake projected images and all that....

.. when taking a empty plane from the vast plane graveyards in the US is so easy.

new topics

top topics

<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in