David Ray Griffin would hold a little more credibility if he was any sort of scientists - which he isn't. Oh, same for the other two guys. (architect is NOT an engineer, BTW).
even thou there's no evidence of explosion found on the ground, the videos and pictures of wtc during the collapse are clear evidence of detonation especially in the wtc 7.
• A petition to launch a real, public, subpoena-empowered, criminal investigation of the events of Sept. 11, 2001 is on the White House website. 5,000 signatures needed by 28 October 2011. Please go & sign that petition, & tell all your friends who care about the truth of 9/11. Spread it wide & quick across the Internet. We need a new fully independent commission to investigate this horrified tragedy.
By the way, I actually made my own 10 minute video explaining why the debunkers claim that an "artillery shell fireball" violates the laws of physics. Just click on my name (fanof2012) to see the video.
David Ray Griffin's claim that a boeing 757 couldn't have possibly made it thru the Pentagon and punched a hole in the C-ring is very substantiated. On the History Channel's 2-hour 9/11 conspiracy show, the debunkers tried to debunk Griffin's claim by saying an "artillery shell fireball" caused the C-ring hole, but their explanation violates the laws of physics.
@ForestdaGump This test was in response to the specific troofer claim that the hole the plane left was too small. As far as we can see, EMRTC's model doesn't have internal columns. I would think they averaged the structural strength and scaled that average value down.
It's seems you want more extensive testing. Are you willing to pay for it, as National Geographic did? Do you think we should spend taxpayer dollars on it?
So absurd to have a theologian, architect and punk discussing science! Couldn't the troofer moment come up with a structural engineer, a civil engineer or even a mechanical engineer?! Really??
Ok this does not make sence, at 4:16 the left wing goes in the buildind, the narrator say the plane made a hole the size of the plane but there's no hole where the wing went through.
@eugenemr Watch the simulations again. The holes are the blown out windows. The parts of the wing which got deflected by the masonry between windows are the metal bits which Griffin claims were 'pushed outward' by his imaginary explosion. See?
The most clever conspiracy theorists & all of their conspiracy theories are just about the equivalent of my dog postulating a hypothesis on how we can exceed the speed of light through the vacuum of space.
Good post man.... But really, what it all boils down to, nobody will EVER know the truth in their life time if it was an inside job, just the JFK assassination, it will be buried and lost forever... So, why is there no explanation for building 7 in this? Oh well, RIP to those who lost their life that very sad day
You can tell DRG thought he himself was a fucking idiot, hence why he didn't bother going into his theory with a guy that actually knows what he's doing/talking about.
@Swazi4 LMAO!!! See my above comment. Scientifically flawed and rigged experiments are a joke. Nice username. DRG is a gatekeeper and globalist. Hear the side busters controlling the show?
Why do they keep saying the nose made it? Everyone in the sane world knows it was the landing gear, which is one of the strongest portions of the plane.
National Geographic is full of shit. The narrator's shows an obvious bias, and these bs test prove nothing. It appears this was setup to prove a particular side wrong, instead of a real investigation. This just may be the worst thing I've ever seen NG involved in. NG only lost points with me.
Case number one twin towers. Plane put down two huge buildings and melted the metal in the buildings . Case number 2 same kind of plane hits pentagon and cause minor damage and ther's no wings and even phonebook on the side is not burned. Yeah bush was telling that storie to the kids in childcare while that was happening. STILL THERES nothing mentioned about building number 7 ???? KJC24 please I can see you have answers for everything what the hell happen with building 7 ? s t u p i d p p l rlz
OMG! they take an aluminum tube & smash it through the concrete, then they place a explosive in the already comprimised integrity & explode it from the inside out. I have no faith in humanities intelligence. I see 3 tests that completely disreguard any logic. & as people are buying this crap is proof of the lack of any logical reasoning or rational. 3 tests & all of them failed to use a scientific approach, much less presented any variables involved.
@LendMeYourHand In that experiment, EMRTC was comparing a hole made by a simulated plane and a hole made by a missile. The plane was represented by the tube since a plane's wings don't contribute that much to the hit. The charge *inside another model* represented a missile's explosive charge.
Exactly what is your problem with the tests? That they were scaled down? That the structural integrity of the model was averaged?
How about if you try to explain instead of emote? That'd be great!!
@NonnyMus1 Then my comment was obviously geared toward you. You have already gotten your response. Read the post again. Ofcourse scaling & material integrity is a key factor. Considering how metals that were used are far from the multi compound alloys during the event. And how about a detonation on impact? Where is the simulation? This is more like kids playing with pipe bombs & potatoe guns. If you actually take this as evidence, then i cant help you.
@LendMeYourHand No, your emotional post is not geared toward me. What are your specific, logical problems with the tests? Please refrain from emotional terms and name calling. And writing stuff like, "I have no faith in humanities intelligence" doesn't add to the discussion. Focus on facts, please.
And do you know what alloy of aluminum EMRTC used? Do you know the method they used to average and scale structural integrity? How could they have been more 'scientific', in your opinion? Thx!
Did the experiment compansate fot the renforments of the pentagon? Why dont they show the small 15x15 orginal doorway the whole plane went through and left intact? These test only seem to cover a one sided viewpoint. No comment was made about the molten steel on the site of WTC 1&2. Could or was they just had no answer for that so they ingored it? I'm really trying to see both sides here :-s
@Updehill Yes. They averaged the structural strength of the wall and scalled the wall down by the same factor as the plane. EMRTC scientists did that because they wanted to retain the speed of the 'airplane', as they explained to the Truthers.
This section of the documentary was just focusing on the Pentagon myths. I can't remember if the documentary covered the molten steel myth. Either way, that discussion doesn't belong in a discussion of the Pentagon, so let's keep 'em separate.
when the plane hit the pentagon. The terrorist inside used magic and made the wings disappear right before impact. So this is why there was no damage to the walls or windows.
If you want 1/10th the force, you don't take 1/10th of mass and acceleration.
If initial force was 1000, initial mass was 100 and acceleration was 10, 1/10th of force is 100. If you divide iM and iA both by 10 you'd have 10*1 and last I checked 10 != 100.
@94XJ So, according this scale the wings are insignificant? If they would have scaled 1/4 of the original wings on that tube those sheets would have blasted like a bomb hit them.
If you scale down the size and the mass of both the walls and the projectile doesn't the speed need to remain the same? It would seem rather stupid to scale speed down to 1/10th scale at 50mph when mass has already accounted for the force difference.
LOL the wings are not strong to damage the outer wall, then where is the markings of the wings? How about the unbroken windows? Are they also undamagable with the wings? This is beyond ridiculous.
@94XJ You mean they survived just where the wings of the plane supposed to hit? Be sensible, if an airplane's fuselage is causing a damage like a bullet hole, then the wings of the airplane should break some windows, more than in the line of their trajectory.
More discrepancies. First of all, reinforced walls change the blast pattern if it is a missile. So it is logical to think that an airplane hitting a reinforced wall not to leave wing damage, but it is illogical to think that a missile will leave a whole. What kind of reinforced wall are we talking here?
why at 3.44 is the nose of the projectile pointed up :s? why has nobody commented on this , this skews the test. this particular piece of data needs to be revisited
these tests were horible. The beam that's not scale burning in the fuel?!?!? How about the beam with thermite. I mean, what is thermite for if it can't even go through a beam?!?! REALLY? I heard it was for demolition. How about that thin petagon wall in the simulation. Even the buildings that were controlled demolitions fell over to the side a bit, but a building the size of WTC falls within itself?!?!? You can only have so many coincidences then it's no longer coincidence.
Yea, check this out.. im going to show you an apple, tell you its an orange and when you dont believe me ill just call you a "truther" in an attempt to make you look crazy! think it'll work?
HEY FIORWESTCOAST!!!!!!!!!!!! Here is the link that compares the Engine found at the Pentagon to the Engine type from flight 77,,,they are the exact match...I show the Schematics...now admit you have honor and integrity and admit this theory is bogus....
they found the teeth of the passangers on the plane...but how can they not find titanium steel engines? It cant burn through teeth but can through titanium stell engines. BS.
@Fiorwestcoast NEWSFLASH....THEY DID FIND THE ENGINES..........Please give us one source that said they didnt find the engines.......IF you can I will Bow to you and admit I am wrong, a shill,whatever.....tell us, whats your source for these amazing claims of yours................Im calling you out.........I think your lying.......so now defend yourself and give us a CREDIBLE source......Dont just claim someone else who made it up...like dont say ummm loose change.....lol
@JPPolachek there is a link look up 9-11 review...then Engines...they found only one and it does not match the engine of a 747. Look up 9-11 review on yahoo. There is your facts. Oh and just to let you know two on a 747 LOL
@Fiorwestcoast Thanks for making my point....It is in fact the correct engine.....I also saw loose change and the claim that it was the wrong engine was made by a person without knowlege of the engine in question. 9/11 myths shows pieces of wreckage...there are also photos comparing the engine pieces to the schematics of the engine components from flight 77engine..its conclusive.....YOU DO YOUR RESEARCH.
@JPPolachek Proponents of theories that no 757 crashed into the Pentagon have cited the alleged incompatibility of engine debris at the site with the types of engines in Boeing 757s. Two of the more common arguments are:
Only one engine was found at the crash site, whereas a 757 has two engines.
The diameter of the engine parts in the wreckage are only about half the diameter of a 757 engine.
Both of these arguments are fallacious. We consider each separately
ok, do you see what they did here? the EMRTC guy even said this is only a test of what the hole would look like, they send a piece of aluminum through some drywall. the pentagon was made from concrete and steel. i dont think a missle hit the pentagon but those tests are COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT, they couldnt even test this with concrete? they put a bomb inside a wooden box and blow it up and say this is proof? take an unbiased look at this and realize those tests are pretty stupid.
exactly, plus they jumped them with these retarded tests. They weren't told these tests were being conducted, or that they were even going to be shown "tests". Otherwise they would have been prepared and ripped them apart. And because they simply didn't accept them as proof they are "in denial". Typical faither straw men arguments. Very slimy and disgraceful tactics by those corporate controlled crooks. fuck this video.
@tehgreatist There are even more severe flaws with their experiment. The sled is fired at 500mph with grout packed in the nose and its actually tileboard not drywall which is nearly as weak as drywall. Think about scale. A falcon is faster than an F-15 at its scale speed. They would need to slow the projectile to less than 100 mph to be a fair comparison. The narrator tries to dramatize the whole bullshit stunt as well. Its so pathetic its insulting to anyone who has ever had a 2nd grd sci class
@tehgreatist Also they used a solid tube and an airliner is ribs and very thin skin. Regarding the grout in the nose they may as well pack a 757 nose with concrete!!!
not sure about the theories but i do know in order to make a building fall straight down ----the bottom has to be taken out or weakened THATS THE ONLY WAY and lets say by the grace of god it happens once lol im beyond positive it wouldnt happen twice lol let alone 3 times as in the case with the WTC. my opinion is--people were looking up when the real action was at street level and below people just dont understand that I guess but hey its still a free country for now lol think what you want
YEAH, the only way to make a collapse start at the 95th floor, where the airliner hit, was to bomb the basement.
How could ANY engineer forget that principle.
Bomb the basement, to start a collapse at the 95th floor. Of course!
This comes from your incredible, explosives demolition background background.
With MY explosives background, I would tell you that ANYONE who believes the collapse started in the basement, or contributed to the collapse, needs an aspirin.
Interesting doco, but how repetitive do they need to be? Ok, plenty of people are idiots, but you won't be watching this kind of thing if you need everything explained 3 or four times.
"What's the other theory?" asks the EMRTC expert to David Ray Griffin.
dither dither.....umm...umm... "I don't think we need to go over that now" David Ray Griffin, liar, profiteer, conman, coward, scumbag, can't come up with anything to counter the obvious debunking of his twoofer lies.
most truthers don't think a missile hit the pentagon. This is a typical strawman tactic. Notice this video doesn't mention the massive titanium bladed engines that fucking vanished.
It's so much of a joke that at 7:58 all 3 "truther" champions where stumped when they couldn't explain another theory. Funny how Richard Gage was sweating like a pig there.
Gage and Co. were not informed of these "tests". They sprang them on them while recording. Why wouldn't they inform them of the tests before hand? What a bunch of slimy corporate controlled crooks. And when Gage, rightfully so, dismissed the tests as irrelevant, truthers are "in denial". Typical Faither strawman tactics. I expected more from NatGeo.
Even if this were sprung on them or not, it doesn't matter. They had more than enough time to collect themselves and try to respond to the EMRTC's findings. They did not. They dismissed it because the test did explain the hole that punched through the Pentagon.
Dude, are you a frigin retard, cant you see whats going on here. These supposed leaders of the Truther movement would not accept any type of evidence or test that NG would give. National Geo could have built a new Pentagon and crashed a 757 into it, and these morons Griffin and Jones would still be saying......Well ok, now we know for sure what a plane impact looks like, now build another Pentagon and crash a Cruise Missile into it, in case that one matches up also. Do ya see my point dude.
@JPPolachek I see your point. You're trying to tell me any of these tests are proof of the govt's version of 911? If so, you need to get your head examined. They are lying about the events of that day. However, regarding these tests: NIST conducted more credible tests than these and even those tests were bias and even laughable. Especially the shotgun, fireproofing "test". These NatGeo "tests" don't even deserve that much attention. I feel like I'm watching a Fox TV special.
I like how you use the Term "Faither Strawman" You dont realize how right you are. Griffin is a Theolgian who studies Mormon Archeology in South America, were he believes Jesus lived for 7 years......So we already know he is sucseptable to religious beliefs and kinda strange ideas.....well case closed ....and even if they didnt know the tests where gonna happen...does that mean the steel didnt really soften.....or that the demolished building didnt make many many loub bangs before it fell. no
@JPPolachek There was one engine found and it is proved not to be the same size. What are you talking about honor? you are wack. Everyone knows there was no plane that hit the Pentagon. There is proof from the 65 + cameras filming the Pentagon that day...however we only got the one that shows no evedence of any kind...ive done my research and know the truth. You just can handle it.
You are NOT a truth movement, you are a TWOOF movement. You are pseudoscience, silly conspiracist, a fantasy prone dumbass.
9/11 family members don't want a new investigation. A twoofer tried to get family members to sign a petition to ask for a new investigation and only had 48 signatures. There must be about 5,000 to 10,000 possible signatures and he only got 48.
something i dont understand, we obviously have footage of the pentagon being hit, and i know we have slow motion technology, so why dont they just release the footage of the plane hitting the building and shut everyone up? a boeing 757 cruises at 500 mph, max speed 609 mph (from boeing . com), im sure flying this low he wasnt able to maintain maximum velocity, so lets say 500 mph even though it was likely a bit less, there should be sufficient video evidence here.
@Rememberthename8 Of course not, a lot has changed since 9-11. It was 10 years ago, you know!! But back then, a plane could and did strike the Pentagon, sadly.
Nobody cares that was Osama or grandmohter from LA. Where is Osama and Those squad that killed Osama ? -they dead ... where is nuclear weapon from Sadam Hysein ? In imagination of white house ... what special forces from French, Italy,Arabic Emirates doing in Libya ? ... now need to be smart to understand that economics elites manage by presidents. Congratulation ! We are in the new world order.
What are all those gashes on the south side of WTC7 then? What are those flying heavy things that flew in the direction of WTC7 during the collapse of WTC1?
WTC7 also caused serious damage that took years to repair to the verizon building.
There was no free fall besides a 2 second burst on building 7 which is explained by the internal collapse before the outer structure failed as a result.
Twoofers have not presented a single good reason as to why there should be a new investigation.
The plane is not twelve feet wide. you cannot neglect the wings. they will not just fold back. they hold the weight of the entire airplane if flight. Look at the first wtc to get hit. did those wings just fold back? one of these days your going to wake up and us twoofers are going to welcome you and your tenacity!!!!!
Look it up. The cabin of a 757 jet is 11.7 feet long. This is much smaller than the hole made in the Pentagon. You are betting in the wings being unable to punch through reinforced concrete, so then you'll have to explain how the lightpoles were taken down over an are consistent with a 757's wing span.
don't be a moron. The hole was 18 feet wide, and the plane was 12 feet wide not counting the wings which did not penetrate.
You also have to ignore the eye witnesses, debris, lightpoles, generator, victims remains, hijacker remains, FDR data, video of plane hitting pentagon and a million other common sense things you would have to ignore.
Although I would agree that the Pentagon experiment was stupid, I don't see twoofers levelling the same criticism on Richard Gage when using cardboard boxes as experiments to prove that WTC shouldn't have progressively collapsed.
You put these videos up here. Do you really believe these lies? This is such a crocka. If you had a fat budget you could come up with better experiments. This video is throwing it right in your face!!!!! look at 4:12, what happens to the wings? Where do they go? do they just disappear? They are lying!!!! PERIOD!!!! and why? That is the hard question, that everybody is scared of. That is why people don't want to wake up.
Yet again, a member of the twoof movement reminds sane people why the twoofers are nuts.
The wings did not penetrate the reinforced concrete. They did however, knock over many light poles. Eye witnesses describe the wings "folding back" before being dragged through the hole the fuselage left behind.
the "truthers" are detemined to not believe the official story no matter what? have these people even looked at the crash site of flight 93? if wtc 7 isnt the smoking gun (and it is) then the crash site of flight 93 certainly is. the hole that flight 93 is said to have crashed into has been there since at least 1994!
cement fiber board can be broken over ones knee. it is hardly a legitimate test to see if aluminum will penetrate concrete walls. this video is doing nothing but misleading the public some more.
Can anyone explain the photo's of the little hole with the pillar still intact, though damaged, the great looking lawn, and the lower floor pillars that look blown up and out? National security alert-sensitive alert shows all that within 5 min. The rest has witnesses, including cops that say a plane went this way not that. None say a plane hit the building. You know, the photos before the collapse that happen within 30 min.
Uh wait a minute, wasn't the plane aluminum and had wings? I think they should have used a plane skin and added some wings to that projectile. Wasnt the Pentagon made of concrete and not sheetrock? I think they should have used concrete and not sheet rock as the target.
Heres what happened to a real plane after hitting a wall of 200MPH
and yes, the government LIED about having received that intel. french and german intel agencies had apparently given the US warnings of possible attacks on US soil, but the US were too big headed to take it seriously.
kinda like "we have the best intel agency in the world, and we didnt find that intel so it must be wrong".
thats ALL the government have lied about.
yes, its bad, but not nearly as bad as the crazy idea that they were BEHIND the attack
What a crap movie. Even though they try real hard to defend the official story, the movie show how impossible it is to do it. They compare Pentagon with a building made of balsa wood?
yeah, while richard gage compares thw twin towers with cardboard boxes.
at least these guys made it to scale, and exactly the strength and size it should have been.
and they proved it couldnt have been thermite, AND they proved the "truth" movement ignore facts, and they just "thats irrelevant" when faced with evidence that proves them wrong, AND they proved that none of the collapses that day could have been CD.
not even one shred of evidence remains to support your shit ideas and craziness
are you mental? or just willfully in denial "it is hard to defend the official story" amazing....dont u think if there was no conspiracy the official story would have no holes in it? ...but it does, hmmm i wonder why, u know u lack....oh man whats that called again?.......uhh....uhhh..oh yeah, critical thinking! ive concluded that ur just an idiot! lol!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
here's your logic: it's hard to defend the official story, therefore there is a conspiracy. just because it is hard to defend the official story doesn't mean it isn't true. and I stand by my statement that it is even harder to defend the truthers' stories.
I don't get it. Did this prove that 77 hit the Pent?
Why didn't Nat Geo adress the hypothesis about an AA painted A3 Skywarrior? Why did they fill in with the rediculously irrelevent showing of the 1st test going wrong?
Because it is more fun - or maybe easyer - to debunk the missile theory?
Honestly - that obnoxious remark has given me the laughs of my YT-trutherlife.
A truther ONLY wants the truth. And any "truther" that has purposedly lied would in my mind be a shill to harm the movement.
We do make different assumptions and some of them are of course wrong. But that is NOT lying. We conclude based on withheld evidence - we whish we could have the truth. YOU only act programmed zombies.
I built my doghouse 8 x4 with 3/4 inch birch plywood dual level the roof had #30 felt 2 layers of fiberglass then #90 elastomeric felt the spanish barrel tile nothings too good for my danes and weimaraners
or you seriously implying that the government doesnt have advanced technology that theyre keeping from the public, even though theyve been caught plenty of times..(if u ask me with what have theyve been caught with im wasting my txt on you) im amazed of ur lack of thought or imagination, but again im not, theyre alot of amazingly dumb people out there( i think ive found another lol) but u should change ur name from w0bbl3r to fucking retard! lol!!!!!
so we are to believe that something that modern science is saying is IMPOSSIBLE is not really impossible because the government makes secret shit?
doesnt make it any less impossible, does it?
the stealth plane wasnt IMPOSSIBLE, while getting thousands of people (including all those firefighters and PD) to lie about something like this IS impossible
so, without even trying to refute the evidence in this video, they just call everything irrelevant, or pick on pointless points that they still cant back up themselves.
see, this is exactly why the government will never spend millions on another investigation;
because it will only find the same thing as the last one, and the truther morons will STILL call the evidence "irrelevant", as they do every single proven fact and physical and computer simulation done in this documentary.
they proved it couldnt be thermite: irrelevant, they said. they proved it couldnt be CD: irrelevant, they said. they proved it couldnt be a missile at the pentagon: irrelevant, AGAIN.
Now go listen to "Debunking National Geographic 911 Science and Conspiracy", just out here to the right.
Then please notice, how you shake your head in denial.
Then notice, how your brain is in no way able to even think, that there COULD be an inside job.
Finally notice, what your respond to the fact that most rubble - and thereby evidence - was removed from ground zero and feel, how YOU'RE the one, that have to come up with the phrase "Irrelevant!"
yeah, they should have just left all that rubble in the middle of ground zero.
not that they HAD to move it to look for bodies, or that they couldnt just leave it there just for YOU morons to keep coming up with new stupidity to blame the government for.
there is NO evidence of an inside job.
i watched that vid youre talking about, it does nothing at all to prove there was an inside job.
where is the evidence that thermite even CAN be used for controlled demolition?
Notice how you dodge the fact that you're in no way capable of questioning why all that rubble was removed, why FEMA were on the scene already the night before, why a real investigation was kept away and why photographers - exept Kurt Sonnenberg - wasn't allowed to take pictures. And HIS story is interesting!
See, you're in such great denial. "The government DIDN'T do this!" rant, because you think it's impossible and CAN't think otherwise.
are you in anyway qualified to make any of these assumptions? Do you have a degree in anything? These guys talk about nano-thermite when they have never even seen it or had the chance to do a side by side comparison, they talk about the points that they bring up as irrelevant but can't say why. I love their nervous laugh when faced with viable scientific evidence. I don't believe all the test that were conducted make anything conclusive though, but the truthers turn a blind eye.
You love the way this show was edited. Keeps you"safe" in debunkerland: "Nervous" laughs instead of "Why can't we see the Pentagon tapes?" or an analysis of the A3 Skywarrior-theory - which this show didn't find funny enough to debunk - is always a good way of pretending, that there's no inside-job.
If you're a scientist yourself, then you might want to debunk the latest ae911truth-videos about how exploding and pulverising objects behave during the collapse.
well said. but do you think they will make any less money from the NEW version of loose change? will steven jones get any less donations, just because he cant even begin to debate this evidence?
no, because twoofers WANT them to be right, and refuse to accept logic and scientific fact.
maybe when they grow up and leave school, they might see how the real worl works, but for now, its a waste of time debating them
@Exlaxcookies maybe because your just that stupid. Do you need qualified people to tell you that all of these tests are inconclusive, because they are inconclusive & poorly done. How is this proof when you arent smart enough to understand simple physics. You depend on others for your answers, yet the most obsurd tests were done & you just eat it up.
thats ur problem, saying that modern science is saying thats impossible, ur way out of the loop, government has technology at least 40 to 50 years ahead of whats in the public domain, so in a sense ur right, but the defenition of modern science is diffrent to them ( the elite) than it is to us
@08:18
I love it, the truthers see their theories refuted, can't offer anything to counter it but won't budge on their flimsy theory.
mst3k4evur 2 weeks ago
David Ray Griffin would hold a little more credibility if he was any sort of scientists - which he isn't. Oh, same for the other two guys. (architect is NOT an engineer, BTW).
m015094 2 months ago in playlist Uploaded videos
your watching FOX NEWS thats right national geographic is owned by fox news
f1ght2bfr33 2 months ago
All I get from this is that the wings of the plane should be laying on the lawn
howlinwolfcustoms 3 months ago
at least Richard Gage and his AE... sound respectable - and not as batshit crazy as Alex Jones and friends
wildhias 3 months ago
even thou there's no evidence of explosion found on the ground, the videos and pictures of wtc during the collapse are clear evidence of detonation especially in the wtc 7.
danmark24 4 months ago
• A petition to launch a real, public, subpoena-empowered, criminal investigation of the events of Sept. 11, 2001 is on the White House website. 5,000 signatures needed by 28 October 2011. Please go & sign that petition, & tell all your friends who care about the truth of 9/11. Spread it wide & quick across the Internet. We need a new fully independent commission to investigate this horrified tragedy.
plau0088 4 months ago
Richard Gage did a greater service to the US than all of the US military in the past 90 years COMBINED!
RummelsdorfLabs 4 months ago
By the way, I actually made my own 10 minute video explaining why the debunkers claim that an "artillery shell fireball" violates the laws of physics. Just click on my name (fanof2012) to see the video.
fanof2012 5 months ago
David Ray Griffin's claim that a boeing 757 couldn't have possibly made it thru the Pentagon and punched a hole in the C-ring is very substantiated. On the History Channel's 2-hour 9/11 conspiracy show, the debunkers tried to debunk Griffin's claim by saying an "artillery shell fireball" caused the C-ring hole, but their explanation violates the laws of physics.
fanof2012 5 months ago
@ForestdaGump This test was in response to the specific troofer claim that the hole the plane left was too small. As far as we can see, EMRTC's model doesn't have internal columns. I would think they averaged the structural strength and scaled that average value down.
It's seems you want more extensive testing. Are you willing to pay for it, as National Geographic did? Do you think we should spend taxpayer dollars on it?
NonnyMus1 5 months ago
@ForestdaGump Specifically, how was the test flawed?
NonnyMus1 5 months ago
So absurd to have a theologian, architect and punk discussing science! Couldn't the troofer moment come up with a structural engineer, a civil engineer or even a mechanical engineer?! Really??
NonnyMus1 5 months ago
Ok this does not make sence, at 4:16 the left wing goes in the buildind, the narrator say the plane made a hole the size of the plane but there's no hole where the wing went through.
eugenemr 5 months ago
@eugenemr Watch the simulations again. The holes are the blown out windows. The parts of the wing which got deflected by the masonry between windows are the metal bits which Griffin claims were 'pushed outward' by his imaginary explosion. See?
NonnyMus1 5 months ago
The Mythbusters are more thorough and stick to the empirical method more than NG!
778ironman1 5 months ago
@778ironman1 You mean EMRTC, right? Exactly how are they 'non-empirical'?
NonnyMus1 5 months ago
The most clever conspiracy theorists & all of their conspiracy theories are just about the equivalent of my dog postulating a hypothesis on how we can exceed the speed of light through the vacuum of space.
andyrooney12 6 months ago 4
@andyrooney12
ad-hominem much, shill?
thedayitriedtodie 3 months ago
@PakistanRunsAlQaeda The CIA runs AlQaeda.
izzysykopth 7 months ago
Good post man.... But really, what it all boils down to, nobody will EVER know the truth in their life time if it was an inside job, just the JFK assassination, it will be buried and lost forever... So, why is there no explanation for building 7 in this? Oh well, RIP to those who lost their life that very sad day
mjwible27 9 months ago
You can tell DRG thought he himself was a fucking idiot, hence why he didn't bother going into his theory with a guy that actually knows what he's doing/talking about.
Swazi4 9 months ago 2
@Swazi4 LMAO!!! See my above comment. Scientifically flawed and rigged experiments are a joke. Nice username. DRG is a gatekeeper and globalist. Hear the side busters controlling the show?
izzysykopth 7 months ago
Why do they keep saying the nose made it? Everyone in the sane world knows it was the landing gear, which is one of the strongest portions of the plane.
Swazi4 9 months ago
7:13 - 7:45 Notice Dylan Avery's almost zen-like concentration to the q and a with Richard Gage.
thecandidate0607 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
in this entire video presentation, parts one through ten,
the words "World Trade Center Seven" are not spoken
one single time.
NIST did not examine one single piece of steel in their
study of the DEMOLITION of World Trade Center Seven.
NIST even takes absurdity to dizzying new heights by
claiming that fire alone could cause the COMPLETE
DEMOLITION of this building in less than seven seconds.
their only evidence, their CARTOON says so.
bIZAROsPRMN11 11 months ago
National Geographic is full of shit. The narrator's shows an obvious bias, and these bs test prove nothing. It appears this was setup to prove a particular side wrong, instead of a real investigation. This just may be the worst thing I've ever seen NG involved in. NG only lost points with me.
Born2Flesh 11 months ago
hay yo ....... keep in mind that National Geographic is Zionist Chanel
senvat 11 months ago
Case number one twin towers. Plane put down two huge buildings and melted the metal in the buildings . Case number 2 same kind of plane hits pentagon and cause minor damage and ther's no wings and even phonebook on the side is not burned. Yeah bush was telling that storie to the kids in childcare while that was happening. STILL THERES nothing mentioned about building number 7 ???? KJC24 please I can see you have answers for everything what the hell happen with building 7 ? s t u p i d p p l rlz
mblesav 11 months ago
@mblesav , you say: "STILL THERES nothing mentioned about building number 7 ????"
that is correct. in this entire presentation, parts 1 through 10,
the words "World Trade Center Seven" are not spoken one single time.
the ONLY evidence that the government agency NIST has provided that the
DEMOLITION of World Trade Center 7 was an uncontrolled DEMOLITION is a
CARTOON. NIST did not study one single piece of steel from WTC 7.
bIZAROsPRMN11 11 months ago
@bIZAROsPRMN11 they did a 700 page report on it that was completed in 2007
jonLukasC 11 months ago
Comment removed
bIZAROsPRMN11 11 months ago
@jonLukasC , ooooooooooh! they did a
"700 page report"
I AM SHURE dat impressed many imbeciles.
R U AN imbecile ?
bIZAROsPRMN11 11 months ago
@bIZAROsPRMN11 and you think thats my basis for not accepting you crackpot beliefs? wheres you evidence moron?
jonLukasC 11 months ago
@jonLukasC , what part of
>NIST did not study one single piece of steel from WTC 7<
did you find difficult to understand? NIST admits this.
studying ACTUAL pieces of steel from WTC 7, and conducting experiments
that have a 100% chance they can be repeated is more conclusive
EVIDENCE than an exercise in semantics and a CARTOON.
you do not now have to answer the question R U AN imbecile.
NIST also admits free fall of WTC 7. THAT is controlled demolition.
bIZAROsPRMN11 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@jonLukasC , what part of >NIST did not study one single piece of steel
from WTC 7< did you find difficult to understand? NIST admits this.
studying ACTUAL pieces of steel from WTC 7, and conducting experiments
that have a 100% chance they can be repeated is more conclusive
EVIDENCE than an exercise in semantics and a CARTOON.
you do not now have to answer the question R U AN imbecile.
NIST also admits free fall of WTC 7. THAT is controlled demolition.
bIZAROsPRMN11 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
National Geographic Science & Conpsiracy Part 7
now, nearly 70 minutes of video. if you have not fallen asleep
(the actual intent of this video) you may have noticed there has been
ZERO discussion of the DEMOLITION of World Trade Center 7.
information control equals mind control.
bIZAROsPRMN11 1 year ago
does Home Depot have better security cameras than the Pentagon?
Lee Evey, program renovation manager explains what happened to Flight 77's sheared off wing.
[]"... one wing ... was sheared off by the force of the impact with the Pentagon's load-bearing columns, ..."
Mete Sozen, Purdue University.
Popular Mechanics - March 2005
[] "Actually, there's considerable evidence of the aircraft outside the E ring. It's just not very visible."
Lee Evey - Pentagon Renovation Manager , 9-15-2001
bIZAROsPRMN11 1 year ago
OMG! they take an aluminum tube & smash it through the concrete, then they place a explosive in the already comprimised integrity & explode it from the inside out. I have no faith in humanities intelligence. I see 3 tests that completely disreguard any logic. & as people are buying this crap is proof of the lack of any logical reasoning or rational. 3 tests & all of them failed to use a scientific approach, much less presented any variables involved.
LendMeYourHand 1 year ago
@LendMeYourHand In that experiment, EMRTC was comparing a hole made by a simulated plane and a hole made by a missile. The plane was represented by the tube since a plane's wings don't contribute that much to the hit. The charge *inside another model* represented a missile's explosive charge.
Exactly what is your problem with the tests? That they were scaled down? That the structural integrity of the model was averaged?
How about if you try to explain instead of emote? That'd be great!!
NonnyMus1 5 months ago
@NonnyMus1 Then my comment was obviously geared toward you. You have already gotten your response. Read the post again. Ofcourse scaling & material integrity is a key factor. Considering how metals that were used are far from the multi compound alloys during the event. And how about a detonation on impact? Where is the simulation? This is more like kids playing with pipe bombs & potatoe guns. If you actually take this as evidence, then i cant help you.
LendMeYourHand 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@LendMeYourHand No, your emotional post is not geared toward me. What are your specific, logical problems with the tests? Please refrain from emotional terms and name calling. And writing stuff like, "I have no faith in humanities intelligence" doesn't add to the discussion. Focus on facts, please.
And do you know what alloy of aluminum EMRTC used? Do you know the method they used to average and scale structural integrity? How could they have been more 'scientific', in your opinion? Thx!
NonnyMus1 4 months ago
Did the experiment compansate fot the renforments of the pentagon? Why dont they show the small 15x15 orginal doorway the whole plane went through and left intact? These test only seem to cover a one sided viewpoint. No comment was made about the molten steel on the site of WTC 1&2. Could or was they just had no answer for that so they ingored it? I'm really trying to see both sides here :-s
Updehill 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Updehill Yes. They averaged the structural strength of the wall and scalled the wall down by the same factor as the plane. EMRTC scientists did that because they wanted to retain the speed of the 'airplane', as they explained to the Truthers.
This section of the documentary was just focusing on the Pentagon myths. I can't remember if the documentary covered the molten steel myth. Either way, that discussion doesn't belong in a discussion of the Pentagon, so let's keep 'em separate.
NonnyMus1 4 months ago
when the plane hit the pentagon. The terrorist inside used magic and made the wings disappear right before impact. So this is why there was no damage to the walls or windows.
nikeheader 1 year ago
Force = Mass * Acceleration
If you want 1/10th the force, you don't take 1/10th of mass and acceleration.
If initial force was 1000, initial mass was 100 and acceleration was 10, 1/10th of force is 100. If you divide iM and iA both by 10 you'd have 10*1 and last I checked 10 != 100.
The scale was done properly.
94XJ 1 year ago
@94XJ So, according this scale the wings are insignificant? If they would have scaled 1/4 of the original wings on that tube those sheets would have blasted like a bomb hit them.
Fussinated 1 year ago
If you scale down the size and the mass of both the walls and the projectile doesn't the speed need to remain the same? It would seem rather stupid to scale speed down to 1/10th scale at 50mph when mass has already accounted for the force difference.
94XJ 1 year ago
@6:38 "I'm a Mac and 9/11 was an inside job!"
DrD0000M 1 year ago
LOL the wings are not strong to damage the outer wall, then where is the markings of the wings? How about the unbroken windows? Are they also undamagable with the wings? This is beyond ridiculous.
Fussinated 1 year ago
@Fussinated Well they are blast resistant windows...they're not 1/8" thick house windows or anything. Not all survived but some did.
94XJ 1 year ago
@94XJ You mean they survived just where the wings of the plane supposed to hit? Be sensible, if an airplane's fuselage is causing a damage like a bullet hole, then the wings of the airplane should break some windows, more than in the line of their trajectory.
Fussinated 1 year ago
More discrepancies. First of all, reinforced walls change the blast pattern if it is a missile. So it is logical to think that an airplane hitting a reinforced wall not to leave wing damage, but it is illogical to think that a missile will leave a whole. What kind of reinforced wall are we talking here?
Fussinated 1 year ago
why at 3.44 is the nose of the projectile pointed up :s? why has nobody commented on this , this skews the test. this particular piece of data needs to be revisited
madmills92 1 year ago
David Ray Griffin has a PhD in theology. He has little to no understanding of any of these things.
dookdawg214 1 year ago
these tests were horible. The beam that's not scale burning in the fuel?!?!? How about the beam with thermite. I mean, what is thermite for if it can't even go through a beam?!?! REALLY? I heard it was for demolition. How about that thin petagon wall in the simulation. Even the buildings that were controlled demolitions fell over to the side a bit, but a building the size of WTC falls within itself?!?!? You can only have so many coincidences then it's no longer coincidence.
MrAubery 1 year ago
The government couldn't cover up a blow job!
soulinite 1 year ago
@sololamer Use your brain. the government couldn't even cover up a blow job!
soulinite 1 year ago
assholes ,, well if they had put wings on that ,, then they cud see the damage that wud be caused in their own experiment.. its a joke.. lol
bigbrother1994 1 year ago
Yea, check this out.. im going to show you an apple, tell you its an orange and when you dont believe me ill just call you a "truther" in an attempt to make you look crazy! think it'll work?
bdragon254 1 year ago
HEY FIORWESTCOAST!!!!!!!!!!!! Here is the link that compares the Engine found at the Pentagon to the Engine type from flight 77,,,they are the exact match...I show the Schematics...now admit you have honor and integrity and admit this theory is bogus....
JPPolachek 1 year ago
@JPPolachek - where is the link? plz by all means lets see it. i want to hear theories from as many perspectives as possible.
bdragon254 1 year ago
a missle is very different from an explosive.
Fiorwestcoast 1 year ago
they found the teeth of the passangers on the plane...but how can they not find titanium steel engines? It cant burn through teeth but can through titanium stell engines. BS.
Fiorwestcoast 1 year ago
They did find it
Newvamp 1 year ago
@Fiorwestcoast NEWSFLASH....THEY DID FIND THE ENGINES..........Please give us one source that said they didnt find the engines.......IF you can I will Bow to you and admit I am wrong, a shill,whatever.....tell us, whats your source for these amazing claims of yours................Im calling you out.........I think your lying.......so now defend yourself and give us a CREDIBLE source......Dont just claim someone else who made it up...like dont say ummm loose change.....lol
JPPolachek 1 year ago 2
@JPPolachek there is a link look up 9-11 review...then Engines...they found only one and it does not match the engine of a 747. Look up 9-11 review on yahoo. There is your facts. Oh and just to let you know two on a 747 LOL
Fiorwestcoast 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Fiorwestcoast Thanks for making my point....It is in fact the correct engine.....I also saw loose change and the claim that it was the wrong engine was made by a person without knowlege of the engine in question. 9/11 myths shows pieces of wreckage...there are also photos comparing the engine pieces to the schematics of the engine components from flight 77engine..its conclusive.....YOU DO YOUR RESEARCH.
JPPolachek 1 year ago
@JPPolachek Proponents of theories that no 757 crashed into the Pentagon have cited the alleged incompatibility of engine debris at the site with the types of engines in Boeing 757s. Two of the more common arguments are:
Only one engine was found at the crash site, whereas a 757 has two engines.
The diameter of the engine parts in the wreckage are only about half the diameter of a 757 engine.
Both of these arguments are fallacious. We consider each separately
Fiorwestcoast 1 year ago
Where are all the 65 cameras? there were 65 filming that day. They were all confiscated . It is obvious that it was inside job.
Fiorwestcoast 1 year ago
ok, do you see what they did here? the EMRTC guy even said this is only a test of what the hole would look like, they send a piece of aluminum through some drywall. the pentagon was made from concrete and steel. i dont think a missle hit the pentagon but those tests are COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT, they couldnt even test this with concrete? they put a bomb inside a wooden box and blow it up and say this is proof? take an unbiased look at this and realize those tests are pretty stupid.
tehgreatist 2 years ago 14
exactly, plus they jumped them with these retarded tests. They weren't told these tests were being conducted, or that they were even going to be shown "tests". Otherwise they would have been prepared and ripped them apart. And because they simply didn't accept them as proof they are "in denial". Typical faither straw men arguments. Very slimy and disgraceful tactics by those corporate controlled crooks. fuck this video.
jeroliver 1 year ago
@tehgreatist There are even more severe flaws with their experiment. The sled is fired at 500mph with grout packed in the nose and its actually tileboard not drywall which is nearly as weak as drywall. Think about scale. A falcon is faster than an F-15 at its scale speed. They would need to slow the projectile to less than 100 mph to be a fair comparison. The narrator tries to dramatize the whole bullshit stunt as well. Its so pathetic its insulting to anyone who has ever had a 2nd grd sci class
izzysykopth 7 months ago
@tehgreatist Also they used a solid tube and an airliner is ribs and very thin skin. Regarding the grout in the nose they may as well pack a 757 nose with concrete!!!
izzysykopth 7 months ago
not sure about the theories but i do know in order to make a building fall straight down ----the bottom has to be taken out or weakened THATS THE ONLY WAY and lets say by the grace of god it happens once lol im beyond positive it wouldnt happen twice lol let alone 3 times as in the case with the WTC. my opinion is--people were looking up when the real action was at street level and below people just dont understand that I guess but hey its still a free country for now lol think what you want
daheat0627 2 years ago
@daheat0627
YEAH, the only way to make a collapse start at the 95th floor, where the airliner hit, was to bomb the basement.
How could ANY engineer forget that principle.
Bomb the basement, to start a collapse at the 95th floor. Of course!
This comes from your incredible, explosives demolition background background.
With MY explosives background, I would tell you that ANYONE who believes the collapse started in the basement, or contributed to the collapse, needs an aspirin.
Merlin5x5 2 years ago
Interesting doco, but how repetitive do they need to be? Ok, plenty of people are idiots, but you won't be watching this kind of thing if you need everything explained 3 or four times.
Trixtah 2 years ago
"What's the other theory?" asks the EMRTC expert to David Ray Griffin.
dither dither.....umm...umm... "I don't think we need to go over that now" David Ray Griffin, liar, profiteer, conman, coward, scumbag, can't come up with anything to counter the obvious debunking of his twoofer lies.
terrymanning1 2 years ago
A roman candle would confuse Gage
Obelisk2290 2 years ago
most truthers don't think a missile hit the pentagon. This is a typical strawman tactic. Notice this video doesn't mention the massive titanium bladed engines that fucking vanished.
jeroliver 2 years ago
They didn't "vanish", they broke up. There's even pics of the turbine fans and other components around if anyone cares to look
Trixtah 2 years ago
I've seen ALL of the pictures available. One (Smaller) turbine fan. One was shown OUTSIDE the building! wtf?
This NatGeo test of shooting a tube through drywall is a JOKE!
jeroliver 2 years ago
It's so much of a joke that at 7:58 all 3 "truther" champions where stumped when they couldn't explain another theory. Funny how Richard Gage was sweating like a pig there.
godzilla1077 2 years ago
Gage and Co. were not informed of these "tests". They sprang them on them while recording. Why wouldn't they inform them of the tests before hand? What a bunch of slimy corporate controlled crooks. And when Gage, rightfully so, dismissed the tests as irrelevant, truthers are "in denial". Typical Faither strawman tactics. I expected more from NatGeo.
jeroliver 1 year ago
Even if this were sprung on them or not, it doesn't matter. They had more than enough time to collect themselves and try to respond to the EMRTC's findings. They did not. They dismissed it because the test did explain the hole that punched through the Pentagon.
godzilla1077 1 year ago
"They dismissed it because the test did explain the hole that punched through the Pentagon."
Really? a tube goes through drywall so it was definitely a passenger plane that hit the pentagon? good logic. we're done.
jeroliver 1 year ago
It wasn't a missile. The hole was too big to be a laser guided or bunker buster missile.
godzilla1077 1 year ago
Dude, are you a frigin retard, cant you see whats going on here. These supposed leaders of the Truther movement would not accept any type of evidence or test that NG would give. National Geo could have built a new Pentagon and crashed a 757 into it, and these morons Griffin and Jones would still be saying......Well ok, now we know for sure what a plane impact looks like, now build another Pentagon and crash a Cruise Missile into it, in case that one matches up also. Do ya see my point dude.
JPPolachek 1 year ago
@JPPolachek I see your point. You're trying to tell me any of these tests are proof of the govt's version of 911? If so, you need to get your head examined. They are lying about the events of that day. However, regarding these tests: NIST conducted more credible tests than these and even those tests were bias and even laughable. Especially the shotgun, fireproofing "test". These NatGeo "tests" don't even deserve that much attention. I feel like I'm watching a Fox TV special.
jeroliver 1 year ago
I like how you use the Term "Faither Strawman" You dont realize how right you are. Griffin is a Theolgian who studies Mormon Archeology in South America, were he believes Jesus lived for 7 years......So we already know he is sucseptable to religious beliefs and kinda strange ideas.....well case closed ....and even if they didnt know the tests where gonna happen...does that mean the steel didnt really soften.....or that the demolished building didnt make many many loub bangs before it fell. no
JPPolachek 1 year ago
@JPPolachek There was one engine found and it is proved not to be the same size. What are you talking about honor? you are wack. Everyone knows there was no plane that hit the Pentagon. There is proof from the 65 + cameras filming the Pentagon that day...however we only got the one that shows no evedence of any kind...ive done my research and know the truth. You just can handle it.
Fiorwestcoast 1 year ago
Comment removed
jeroliver 1 year ago
You are NOT a truth movement, you are a TWOOF movement. You are pseudoscience, silly conspiracist, a fantasy prone dumbass.
9/11 family members don't want a new investigation. A twoofer tried to get family members to sign a petition to ask for a new investigation and only had 48 signatures. There must be about 5,000 to 10,000 possible signatures and he only got 48.
KJC24 2 years ago 18
something i dont understand, we obviously have footage of the pentagon being hit, and i know we have slow motion technology, so why dont they just release the footage of the plane hitting the building and shut everyone up? a boeing 757 cruises at 500 mph, max speed 609 mph (from boeing . com), im sure flying this low he wasnt able to maintain maximum velocity, so lets say 500 mph even though it was likely a bit less, there should be sufficient video evidence here.
tehgreatist 2 years ago
@KJC24 LOLZZZZZ DO YOU ACTUALLY THINK A PLANE HAS A CHANCE OF HITTING THE PENTAGON? Your obviously not a member of this present day and year.
Rememberthename8 5 months ago
@Rememberthename8 Of course not, a lot has changed since 9-11. It was 10 years ago, you know!! But back then, a plane could and did strike the Pentagon, sadly.
NonnyMus1 5 months ago
@KJC24
Nobody cares that was Osama or grandmohter from LA. Where is Osama and Those squad that killed Osama ? -they dead ... where is nuclear weapon from Sadam Hysein ? In imagination of white house ... what special forces from French, Italy,Arabic Emirates doing in Libya ? ... now need to be smart to understand that economics elites manage by presidents. Congratulation ! We are in the new world order.
MrSanbonsakura 5 months ago
You're saying WTC1 didn't hit WTC7? LOL!
What are all those gashes on the south side of WTC7 then? What are those flying heavy things that flew in the direction of WTC7 during the collapse of WTC1?
WTC7 also caused serious damage that took years to repair to the verizon building.
KJC24 2 years ago
a skyscraper fell on wtc7
KJC24 2 years ago 2
@KJC24 No, a skyscraper did not fall on WTC7,
Fussinated 1 year ago
There was no free fall besides a 2 second burst on building 7 which is explained by the internal collapse before the outer structure failed as a result.
Twoofers have not presented a single good reason as to why there should be a new investigation.
KJC24 2 years ago
The plane is not twelve feet wide. you cannot neglect the wings. they will not just fold back. they hold the weight of the entire airplane if flight. Look at the first wtc to get hit. did those wings just fold back? one of these days your going to wake up and us twoofers are going to welcome you and your tenacity!!!!!
ttbone8054757 2 years ago
Look it up. The cabin of a 757 jet is 11.7 feet long. This is much smaller than the hole made in the Pentagon. You are betting in the wings being unable to punch through reinforced concrete, so then you'll have to explain how the lightpoles were taken down over an are consistent with a 757's wing span.
KJC24 2 years ago
the hole wasn't big enough for the plane to fit through
agentzippo 2 years ago
don't be a moron. The hole was 18 feet wide, and the plane was 12 feet wide not counting the wings which did not penetrate.
You also have to ignore the eye witnesses, debris, lightpoles, generator, victims remains, hijacker remains, FDR data, video of plane hitting pentagon and a million other common sense things you would have to ignore.
KJC24 2 years ago
Although I would agree that the Pentagon experiment was stupid, I don't see twoofers levelling the same criticism on Richard Gage when using cardboard boxes as experiments to prove that WTC shouldn't have progressively collapsed.
KJC24 2 years ago
You put these videos up here. Do you really believe these lies? This is such a crocka. If you had a fat budget you could come up with better experiments. This video is throwing it right in your face!!!!! look at 4:12, what happens to the wings? Where do they go? do they just disappear? They are lying!!!! PERIOD!!!! and why? That is the hard question, that everybody is scared of. That is why people don't want to wake up.
ttbone8054757 2 years ago
Yet again, a member of the twoof movement reminds sane people why the twoofers are nuts.
The wings did not penetrate the reinforced concrete. They did however, knock over many light poles. Eye witnesses describe the wings "folding back" before being dragged through the hole the fuselage left behind.
KJC24 2 years ago
the "truthers" are detemined to not believe the official story no matter what? have these people even looked at the crash site of flight 93? if wtc 7 isnt the smoking gun (and it is) then the crash site of flight 93 certainly is. the hole that flight 93 is said to have crashed into has been there since at least 1994!
vengencefrom1979 2 years ago
cement fiber board can be broken over ones knee. it is hardly a legitimate test to see if aluminum will penetrate concrete walls. this video is doing nothing but misleading the public some more.
vengencefrom1979 2 years ago
lol is it just me or did they just shoot a dildo at 500 miles per hour?
skinnywhop87 2 years ago
Can anyone explain the photo's of the little hole with the pillar still intact, though damaged, the great looking lawn, and the lower floor pillars that look blown up and out? National security alert-sensitive alert shows all that within 5 min. The rest has witnesses, including cops that say a plane went this way not that. None say a plane hit the building. You know, the photos before the collapse that happen within 30 min.
bigc028282 2 years ago
Uh wait a minute, wasn't the plane aluminum and had wings? I think they should have used a plane skin and added some wings to that projectile. Wasnt the Pentagon made of concrete and not sheetrock? I think they should have used concrete and not sheet rock as the target.
Heres what happened to a real plane after hitting a wall of 200MPH
watch?v=nBmaOBIColc&feature=fvw
IwishIknew02 2 years ago
This thing doesn't debunk a thing. It doesn't even do a good job of despunking.
bigc028282 2 years ago
I couldn't agree with you more.
IwishIknew02 2 years ago
why didnt they shoot a landing gear threw real walls because they say the landinggear is what punched out
sidneyoh 2 years ago
Also the plane that struck the pentagon also knocked a 20 ton generator off its mooring. A missle would not do that
Obelisk2290 2 years ago
yes its funny to think four lamppost and a 20 ton generator and a wall and not any parts on the lawn
sidneyoh 2 years ago
I can't believe anyone is still a Pentagon no-planer.
Was all the jet wreckage planted?
Were all the witnesses lying?
Wil truthers ever move out of mom's basement?
All questions that need answering.
CHF2 2 years ago
and yes, the government LIED about having received that intel. french and german intel agencies had apparently given the US warnings of possible attacks on US soil, but the US were too big headed to take it seriously.
kinda like "we have the best intel agency in the world, and we didnt find that intel so it must be wrong".
thats ALL the government have lied about.
yes, its bad, but not nearly as bad as the crazy idea that they were BEHIND the attack
w0bbl3r 2 years ago
What's the other theory mr Griffin?
mittel67 2 years ago
What a crap movie. Even though they try real hard to defend the official story, the movie show how impossible it is to do it. They compare Pentagon with a building made of balsa wood?
Shadowball16 2 years ago
yeah, while richard gage compares thw twin towers with cardboard boxes.
at least these guys made it to scale, and exactly the strength and size it should have been.
and they proved it couldnt have been thermite, AND they proved the "truth" movement ignore facts, and they just "thats irrelevant" when faced with evidence that proves them wrong, AND they proved that none of the collapses that day could have been CD.
not even one shred of evidence remains to support your shit ideas and craziness
w0bbl3r 2 years ago
It is hard to defend the official story. But, it even harder to defend the truthers' stories.
sadgar 2 years ago
Good that you find the OCT hard to defend.
The truther-version - or rather versions - are only hard to defend because we can't agree on what FBI won't let us know anyway.
Thetan1974 2 years ago
are you mental? or just willfully in denial "it is hard to defend the official story" amazing....dont u think if there was no conspiracy the official story would have no holes in it? ...but it does, hmmm i wonder why, u know u lack....oh man whats that called again?.......uhh....uhhh..oh yeah, critical thinking! ive concluded that ur just an idiot! lol!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
arizonaboss 2 years ago
here's your logic: it's hard to defend the official story, therefore there is a conspiracy. just because it is hard to defend the official story doesn't mean it isn't true. and I stand by my statement that it is even harder to defend the truthers' stories.
sadgar 2 years ago
I don't get it. Did this prove that 77 hit the Pent?
Why didn't Nat Geo adress the hypothesis about an AA painted A3 Skywarrior? Why did they fill in with the rediculously irrelevent showing of the 1st test going wrong?
Because it is more fun - or maybe easyer - to debunk the missile theory?
Thetan1974 2 years ago
did anyone think truthers will admit the thuth? what a shock
Obelisk2290 2 years ago
of course they wouldnt, but its funny to see their comments in the face of yet more evidence, isnt it?
w0bbl3r 2 years ago
LOL That's right - truthers don't want the truth.
Honestly - that obnoxious remark has given me the laughs of my YT-trutherlife.
A truther ONLY wants the truth. And any "truther" that has purposedly lied would in my mind be a shill to harm the movement.
We do make different assumptions and some of them are of course wrong. But that is NOT lying. We conclude based on withheld evidence - we whish we could have the truth. YOU only act programmed zombies.
Thetan1974 2 years ago
hours of fun for the whole family agin i would not trust gage to build a doghouse for me
Obelisk2290 2 years ago
i love my dog. i would have to HATE my dog to put her in a doghouse built (or designed) by that lying peice of shit
w0bbl3r 2 years ago
I built my doghouse 8 x4 with 3/4 inch birch plywood dual level the roof had #30 felt 2 layers of fiberglass then #90 elastomeric felt the spanish barrel tile nothings too good for my danes and weimaraners
Obelisk2290 2 years ago
i bet i could bring it down with SUPER-thermite, or nano-thermite.
can we find any OTHER things that dont exist i could bring your doghouse down with?
i bet gage and co. could.
i bet alex jones could find some nonexistent explosive that could do it.
failing that the government will do it anyway, because it will obviouslty make them a shitload of money some impossible way, right?
w0bbl3r 2 years ago 2
actually i remember seeing a video of thermite and it could not even eat thru a computer tower
Obelisk2290 2 years ago
sure u have
arizonaboss 2 years ago
or you seriously implying that the government doesnt have advanced technology that theyre keeping from the public, even though theyve been caught plenty of times..(if u ask me with what have theyve been caught with im wasting my txt on you) im amazed of ur lack of thought or imagination, but again im not, theyre alot of amazingly dumb people out there( i think ive found another lol) but u should change ur name from w0bbl3r to fucking retard! lol!!!!!
arizonaboss 2 years ago
so we are to believe that something that modern science is saying is IMPOSSIBLE is not really impossible because the government makes secret shit?
doesnt make it any less impossible, does it?
the stealth plane wasnt IMPOSSIBLE, while getting thousands of people (including all those firefighters and PD) to lie about something like this IS impossible
w0bbl3r 2 years ago
so, without even trying to refute the evidence in this video, they just call everything irrelevant, or pick on pointless points that they still cant back up themselves.
w0bbl3r 2 years ago
see, this is exactly why the government will never spend millions on another investigation;
because it will only find the same thing as the last one, and the truther morons will STILL call the evidence "irrelevant", as they do every single proven fact and physical and computer simulation done in this documentary.
they proved it couldnt be thermite: irrelevant, they said. they proved it couldnt be CD: irrelevant, they said. they proved it couldnt be a missile at the pentagon: irrelevant, AGAIN.
w0bbl3r 2 years ago
Thankyou.
Now go listen to "Debunking National Geographic 911 Science and Conspiracy", just out here to the right.
Then please notice, how you shake your head in denial.
Then notice, how your brain is in no way able to even think, that there COULD be an inside job.
Finally notice, what your respond to the fact that most rubble - and thereby evidence - was removed from ground zero and feel, how YOU'RE the one, that have to come up with the phrase "Irrelevant!"
Thetan1974 2 years ago
yeah, they should have just left all that rubble in the middle of ground zero.
not that they HAD to move it to look for bodies, or that they couldnt just leave it there just for YOU morons to keep coming up with new stupidity to blame the government for.
there is NO evidence of an inside job.
i watched that vid youre talking about, it does nothing at all to prove there was an inside job.
where is the evidence that thermite even CAN be used for controlled demolition?
finding ally and iron oxide?
w0bbl3r 2 years ago
Notice how you dodge the fact that you're in no way capable of questioning why all that rubble was removed, why FEMA were on the scene already the night before, why a real investigation was kept away and why photographers - exept Kurt Sonnenberg - wasn't allowed to take pictures. And HIS story is interesting!
See, you're in such great denial. "The government DIDN'T do this!" rant, because you think it's impossible and CAN't think otherwise.
Thetan1974 2 years ago
are you in anyway qualified to make any of these assumptions? Do you have a degree in anything? These guys talk about nano-thermite when they have never even seen it or had the chance to do a side by side comparison, they talk about the points that they bring up as irrelevant but can't say why. I love their nervous laugh when faced with viable scientific evidence. I don't believe all the test that were conducted make anything conclusive though, but the truthers turn a blind eye.
Exlaxcookies 2 years ago 3
You love the way this show was edited. Keeps you"safe" in debunkerland: "Nervous" laughs instead of "Why can't we see the Pentagon tapes?" or an analysis of the A3 Skywarrior-theory - which this show didn't find funny enough to debunk - is always a good way of pretending, that there's no inside-job.
If you're a scientist yourself, then you might want to debunk the latest ae911truth-videos about how exploding and pulverising objects behave during the collapse.
Thetan1974 2 years ago
well said. but do you think they will make any less money from the NEW version of loose change? will steven jones get any less donations, just because he cant even begin to debate this evidence?
no, because twoofers WANT them to be right, and refuse to accept logic and scientific fact.
maybe when they grow up and leave school, they might see how the real worl works, but for now, its a waste of time debating them
w0bbl3r 2 years ago
Comment removed
arizonaboss 2 years ago
@Exlaxcookies maybe because your just that stupid. Do you need qualified people to tell you that all of these tests are inconclusive, because they are inconclusive & poorly done. How is this proof when you arent smart enough to understand simple physics. You depend on others for your answers, yet the most obsurd tests were done & you just eat it up.
LendMeYourHand 1 year ago
thats ur problem, saying that modern science is saying thats impossible, ur way out of the loop, government has technology at least 40 to 50 years ahead of whats in the public domain, so in a sense ur right, but the defenition of modern science is diffrent to them ( the elite) than it is to us
arizonaboss 2 years ago
so, because the government LIES that means that they are behind 9/11?
that makes less sense than any of the other truther nonsense i have heard.
did you hear of a dog biting a child before? well, my dog has teeth, so it must have been my dog, even though thats impossible, right?
they dont have tech that is anywhere NEAR 40 years ahead of the rest of the world. maybe 5-10 years.
its known that the government had warnings about an attack in the USA and didnt take it seriously, thats all there is
w0bbl3r 2 years ago