Added: 2 years ago
From: CTV911
Views: 10,635
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (424)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • so when did John Cole support no plane no brain theory?

  • and when the hell did Jonathan Cole become a no planer? everything I've seen of his dishes no planers as insane or snake oil salesmen, or worse

    are you just cherrypicking what you like and disgarding the rest of an 'expert's work?

  • @Denierbud11 : ROFL.

    I have never claimed what happened b/c I DON'T KNOW. Neither do you. However, I can debunk the official story with physics, & the fact that the high ranking government officials profited from the event makes it even ore evident.

    A plane could have hit the trade center, But is wasn't flight 11 , It wasn't flying at 590, it can't go half in/half out in 1 peice, & the nose can't go all the way through the building.

  • @BadBoriBoy

    false dilema -- the plane did not go have in and half out

  • @Denierbud11 : ROFL

    Half In/Half Out means the plane was half way in the tower with no damage to either the tower or the plane. Yes it was half in/half out. It is fake .

  • @BadBoriBoy

    if the plane is half in, and you can;t see the part that is half in, how do you know the part half in is not damaged

    lol

  • @Denierbud11 LMAO

    B/C the wings would fly off based on the law on inertia.

    Fiberglass/Aluminum vs. Steel/Concrete.

    Again, there is no visible collision btwn the "plane" and the tower in both instances.

  • @BadBoriBoy

    no, the wings would not fly off -- the wings are not that fragile, and they are not made of aluminum, the outerskin is aluminum -- just as the outerskin of the towers were aluminum

    and btw - the same compay made the aluminum on both the towers and the planes

  • @Denierbud11 R-0-f-L

    What a dumbass. The outer skin being aluminum on WTC means nothing when the inner skin was STEEL dumbass. Aluminum is not strong enough to hold the building up. You are quite the RETARD. Most of the body of a 767 is fiberglass retard. Why do you even bother?! You spit non sense with NO science to back it up.

  • @Denierbud11 no visible collision at the Pentagon either.

    Why, because the event is FAKE.

    It's not the first time either, MORON. Religion is fake too. It was designed to control people. Most sporting events are set-up. The music business is set-up. If you can't see it then you are retarded.

  • @BadBoriBoy

    "Most sporting events are set-up"

    that tin foil hat is a little tight

  • @Denierbud11 : Yes they are. SO is the music business. It doesn't matter how good you if there isn't a market for what you have.

    You are the retard that is defending an impossible story which has been PROVEN with experiment.

    Not all REALSITS wear hats. You don't even know anything about the event. You think that the planes "struck" the towers ABOVE SEA LEVEL, What a JOKE!!!

  • @Denierbud11 : ROFL...

    So how did terrorist give fake news to the media?!?! How did the terrorist defy physics when striking the planes into the building?! How did the terrorist get the towers to demise in uniform with no physical evidence of a natural collapse?! How did the terrorist manage to leave 2700 deg F at ground zero for 2 weeks? How did the terrorist obtain 2.5 secs of free fall during their "attack" of WTC7?!?

    I love not being the minority. Only retards would defend the impossible!

  • @Denierbud11 " sea level is sea level"

    Not when referring to a PLANE FLYING IN THE AIR.

  • @BadBoriBoy

    cite the source

    not asking much, just cite the source

  • A pilot who lands day after day on the center line of a runway says that it is impossible to hit a target wider than the plane itself? Credibility lost. Difficult yes. Requires training, yes. impossible, not even remotely!

    "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."

  • @Cre8tvMG I am a pilot and you are correct. If this guy is an Airline Pilot, I REFUSE TO FLY WITH HIM. Plus if 15 year old Charles J. Bishop could slam a building in Tampa, then as you said, Credibiliity lost.

  • @BigOldScout My dad logged several million miles as an airline pilot, from the smallest 727s to the extended 747s. He says that once you're in the air the things are amazingly stable and easy to fly. He also says the 727 was his favorite because the new planes fly themselves so much - the are large and stable. The 727 was an overpowered sports car of a jet, and fun to fly. Not that that has much bearing on this conversation...

  • Guess work... nothing but guess work.... Pilots are NOT EXPERTS. Try Microsoft's airflight training and you WILL be an expert in manning that plane. RIDICULOUS!!

  • and who says he was licensed by FDNY? licensed to do what?

  • So still waiting for a demolition expert from anywhere in the world who thinks the towers were controlled demolitions

    anyone?

  • Just like your car's navigation sytem, couldn't the hijackers have programmed into the plane's autopilot the coordinates for their targets?

  • As a former member of the UK Royal Air Force, not as aircrew, I always thought it was impossible for anybody with X amount of hours spent in a very basic Cesna light aircraft to then take control of an advanced, all glass cokpit, advanced passenger jet airliner! NO WAY! This very fundamentlal fact alone, therefore, underpins the whole absurdity of an Islamic Terror attack of this magnitude, yet alone the total failure of NORAD and NEADS! PNAC pulled off their vision and still it continues!

  • i would love to join the army and do something big for my country and allies but i just cant knowing that 9/11 could have been an inside job it sickens me

  • Very nice job. No refutation of the facts I see. Brilliant. 911 WAS an inside job.

  • Pilots, Architects, Engineers, Scientists, Demolition experts: These are not the conspiracy nutjobs you want them to be. These are experts in their fields and they tell you that most of what we were told happened on 9/11 couldn't have happened. Damn physics, can't get around em!

  • @EndlessFireStorm

    Just curious, what demolition expert thinks the towers were demolition jobs?

    Because Jowenko maintained that was not possible

  • @Denierbud11 tom sullivan, check him out he used to work for Demolition Inc, that was the company who delt with removal of the world trade center debri he worked there at the time

  • @vibeackermann

    yeah, tom sulivan was a tech, he is not a demolitions expert -- what about him? he's not qualified to give expert opinion

    its like asking a janitor a medical opinion

  • @Denierbud11 how is he not a demolitions expert? you define a demolitions expert, he work for Controlled Demolition INC for 2.5 years, loading explosives so if he is not an expert then i dont know who is..................

  • @Denierbud11 he rigged numerous buildings that were demolished and he has vast experience so one would assume in his proffesion he knows what he is talking about, if he didnt know what he was doing, first off he would not have been employed by controlled demolition INC second of all the FNDY would not license him to do his job............

  • @vibeackermann

    well, let's review, he's not an engineer, he's not a demolition expert - he was employed as a photographer by controlled demolition, he claims he was an explosive loader - but that has not been confirmed -- as an explosive loader, he does not have direct access to explosives (he assists those that do) -- at most he is as qualifed as the receptionist at a hospital

    Someone qualified to say "it looks like" is not qualified to give an informed opinion

  • @Denierbud11 : Well Jonathan Cole already proved that it was not only possible, but probable. So yes they were Demolished in a CONTROLLED fashion. Jon has all HIS EXPERIMENTS posted under the " physicsandreason " channel. Don't be ignorant..He already proved you wrong. Look up 9/11 experiments...All you have to do is provide an experiment that disproves someone with PHYSICS & REASON.

  • @BadBoriBoy

    when did Cole prove this and before what body did he present his evidence and have it judged as proof?

    you have no fucking idea what proof is

  • @Denierbud11 : Quitely slicing a steel colum with thermite is PROOF retard.

    g

    That proves that it was a possibility consider that the temps match thermite/mate. And, the visual evidence represents it as well which was also proven by experiment. I'm still waiting for your expeiment..

  • @BadBoriBoy

    "Quitely slicing a steel colum with thermite is PROOF "

    who sliced a steel column with thermite? how did they get the thermite to the steel with no witnesses and no evidence of the act?

  • @Denierbud11 : The Great Thermite Debate

    Under the 'physicsandreason' channel. I'm done w/ u. You don't bring any valid debates to the table. You debunk yourself in your own comments. I have never had to argue that WTC was sea level w/ anyone. Only a stupid retard would think it was above sea level.

  • @BadBoriBoy

    so, you claim 2000 feet is sea level, that its basic knowledge, and when asked to cite evidence, you cannot cite -- you can cry and shout indignations, claim anyone who disagrees with you is a moron, but you just can;t seem to support your statement

    gee, I wonder why that is

  • @Denierbud11 : ROFL;

    Call American Airlines yourself & ask them if the WTC was above sea level. They will laugh at you. You are the only person dumb enough to argue it. You are not very good at debate. You don't even know the first thing about flying, & you think you can argue that a 767 can fly 590mph 1000ft off the ground.>>>>You are retarded if you believe that. It is Impossible.

  • @BadBoriBoy

    cite a source -- cite a source

    its a simple concept, cite a source

  • @Denierbud11 : What a dumbass. I gave you plenty of sources. It is also common sense. If you want a source look up " mean sea level" in google. Or better yet ask any Pilot( who will laugh at you btw),

    You are the ONLY retard to argue that WTC was above the altitude know by EVERY pilot as sea/ground level,

    WHAT A DUMBASS. I have told you at least 20 times & you still don;t get what it means, & you still are dumb enough to think that the twin towers stood above the average mean se level. LMAO!!

  • who can make a video of the first strike on 9/11 with the AGM JASSM-158 missile with the nave blue logo flying into the first twin ?! as seen from the french film makers standing about a quarter mile away from the crime scene !

  • Dude.... you are so far off base that is not funny..... and we did the same simulators in the agency and we were able to do it with very limited experience... so nice try... it can be done.

  • @AmphibiousKnight Hmmm. Well can you put a video up please so we can see? I think you might be telling porkies.

  • @tamather2647 No so called porkies here even thought I do not understand that slang that you are using. Sorry can not video tape and put on Youtube the simulations from DTRA but I can tell you what software did the calculations and it is called IMEA... do not worry, it is not classified until live numbers are put in. So there you go. We can agree to disagree but I will just watch all the speculation from the inside out.

  • can we see the pilots footage of them trying to hit the towers please!!!!????

    in the simulator

  • @ivorbigonee its on the video lol

  • @tamather2647 i spoke too early lol

  • I watched on TV from 5 minutes after the first plane hit til the Towers fell on a treadmill nonstop for almost 3 hours....anyone who thinks this is staged needs to put their head on a stage so I can step on it and you can tell me if that was staged too! Idiots led by morons....Mohammed Atta and the little brown men with box cutters killed our fellow Americans and our Navy Seals killed Osama Bin Laden!

    We will not stop until they are all dead....'you are with us or you are with them" GW Bush

  • LOL idiots on this video.

  • Great video!!

  • watch dave chandler's videos of south tower collapse. pretty obvious stuff. also, you might wat to refer to Newton's 3 Laws of Objects in Motion. You don't think we should revise those because of this do you?

  • Those margins of error assume that they intended to hit those specific parts of the respective buildings. The MOE for the Pentagon is CONSIDERABLY larger if the target is expanded to be the entire object.

  • yet more evidence

    inside job

  • wrong hijacker

  • So what's your point? Are you saying the planes were piloted by someone else? Or are you saying that planes didn't hit the WTC... that they were holograms? I've heard truthers say the Twin Towers were holograms as well. Do you believe that?

  • @rickyseabra "I've heard truthers say the Twin Towers were holograms as well"

    No you haven't, get lost sheep.

  • @ImyManz99 yes i have. So what's the point of this video? The video claims that what we saw was impossible. But it happened. (Planes hit the towers at high speeds). So what is it? What's your explanation? Were the planes not planes? Were the towers not towers? Were the pilots Navy Seals? Speak up.

  • @rickyseabra No Boeing 767s were flown into the WTC. It is physically impossible for a 767 to be A) piloted at 575mph at near sea level, B) parked inside of a steel and concrete skyscraper without observing any crash physics. Planes do not melt into skyscrapers, they crash against them. The 9/11 crash videos are fake and were composited from scratch. The only thing that DID happen is the entire WTC complex was pulverized into dust. Arab kids did not do this.

  • @ImyManz99 Hmmmm. so all my friends who live in Manhattan and saw the planes fly overhead before hitting the towers were lying to me and must get monthly paychecks from the CIA to shut up and keep lying to me. Wow. The world sucks.

  • @rickyseabra "were lying to me and must get monthly paychecks from the CIA to shut up"

    ^ This is an invention of your own and is irrelevant to the subject. Your friends may very well had seen a plane "fly overhead", what they did not see is a 767 impacting a steel and concrete skyscraper. There is conclusive proof of fraudulent imagery aired by the MSM, and furthermore, the laws of physics are not temporarily suspended during a "terrorist attack".

  • @ImyManz99 So the laws of physics are on your side. Typical truther tactics. This is the basis for all truther argumentation.: "I said it hence it's truth"... No wonder you call yourselves truthers. An airplane flew into the Empire State. A 747 flew into a building in Amsterdam. An airplane flew into a building on the East Side of Manhattan. An airplane flew into a skyscraper in Italy. And yes my friends saw a plane fly overhead AND into the towers and you suggest they work for the CIA. :-/

  • @rickyseabra Funny all those Planes thats hit buildings and I bet not a single one of them collapsed globally,symetrically into the path of most resistance at near free fall acceleration? Not a one,huh?

  • @AiresQX4 didn't fall at free fall acceleration. do shut up you silly silly silly boy.

  • @rickyseabra Silly boy needs to learn to read. I said "NEAR free fall acceleration" Don't you feel smart.

  • @AiresQX4 Sorry... you can't have it both ways. Either it fell at free fall or it didn't. And if you count the seconds and look at the debris from the top of the building (falling at free fall) hitting the ground before the building collapsing on itself you see that it didn't fall at free fall speed at all. Far from it. Watch /watch?v=x4sRi5stG10 and you see how the South Tower east façade columns were bending inward prior to the collapse... between 0:00 and 0:30, no bombs, no explosives.

  • @rickyseabra It did fall at NEAR free fall acceleration. And for tower 7 actually did have complete free fall for 2.2 seconds. Nist denied this fact stating it would be impossible until David Chandler proved it otherwise.. So what do you have to say about that? Watch "Nist finally admits free fall" before responding with garbage that is not true. You need to watch all of "David Chandlers" vids before thinking you know anything of 911.. SERIOUSLY!!

  • @AiresQX4 So you're saying there were explosives on every floor of the towers, huh? The explosions from the airplanes hitting were almost 500 feet long and they didn't bring the towers down immediately. So you're saying that little inaudible explosions on every floor would have taken down the towers? So what's your theory? Planes? No planes? UFOs? Holograms? Government disappeared the passengers?

  • @rickyseabra Have you ever seen a controlled demolition video?

  • @tudormihalache1 yes i've seen controlled demoliton videos. There are flashes of light, sequential loud explosions coming from within the buildings prior to collapse. The buildings collapse at the base and cave into their footprints. The WTC Towers collapsed differently: from top to bottom; the South tower bending inwards at the east façade, the North tower collapsing failing at the 91st floor, both spreading debris over hundreds of yards around their footprints... not in their footprints.

  • @ImyManz99 ah... one more thing. My best friend in Manhattan didn't see the plane. She was driving with her husband and kid a few blocks north of the Towers when they HEARD the plane fly overhead. Then they heard a big bang. They turned the corner, looked up and saw the hole at top of the North Tower. So if there was no plane, where were the speakers located that played the loud plane soundtrack prior to the explosion? Or are they lying to me as well?

  • @ImyManz99 thats right. random people online may claim they saw planes but we do not know who they are . New York is full of high rises and a plane flying at the stated speed would pass overhead in an intsant

    If a plane in Beijing flew overhead I would almost certanly not see it so how come this Brazilian claims he had lots of friends seeing the plane

    No

  • @DMB1985CA He made a doctors appointment probably weeks ahead of time. But his wife had to force him to take it. It was a good thing too. It "coincidentally" saved his life. WHEW!!! That was a close one. WAKE UP.

  • NOMCCBAMA Is it that you have seen the new prophecie, about the 'dutch roll'?

    DUTCH ROLL! See the information on my channel, now.

    Cte est tres important, vois maintenant s'il te plait... l'aimeras!

  • Comment removed

  • @999II0OlllO0II666 Hill is very important, now see if you like ... the love

  • @NOMCCBAMA

    Hill? No, this is not so important... do you know?... you donot.a12c4... why are you to say which you know... & it is clear you have not knowing this fact... Cte = cette [the abbreviacion!]

    /This is very important, please look now... you will like it!/ perhaps your InterNet translate programme is not function.

  • IT IS PERPOSTEROUS TO BELIEVE WE WERE DECIEVED ON 9/11,,,,,,,,,,EVEN THOUGH THE GOVERNMENT HAS LIED TO US ON MANY MANY OCCASION,,,,,,,,THEY SIMPLY WOULD NEVER LIE ABOUT THE MURDER OF THEIR OWN CIVILIANS,,,,,,,,I AM GONNA PREACH THE EVIL BROWN GUY BOX CUTTER STORY,,,,,,,,CUZ IT WAS ON TV SO IT HAS TO BE THE TRUTH,,,,,,,,,LETS RISE UP AGAINST THE TRUTH SEEKERS,,,,,,,CUZ I DON'T WANT THE TRUTH,,,,,,,I WANT MY TELEVISION,,,,,IT WOULD NEVER EVER DECIEVE ME,,,,,THE BROWN GUYS WITH BOXCUTTERS DID IT

  • @bigbopper993 Pourquoi est-ce que ton 'comedy-act' conteint pas la comedie? En outre tu es un beauf... et un un pequenot... comme des bouseux. Va te faire foutre, s'il te plait... Suce-moi la grande bite, ensuite je peux jouir sur ton visage... n'est-ce pas? Filmons-nous en train de faire... comme je dans ta gorge profunde... OK?

    A12C4, plouc. Tu es aussi cultive que mon chien... gros con. :) Vive Quebec!!!

    CAPS LOCK = sans argument veritable...

  • @999II0OlllO0II666 SPEAK ENGLISH TO ME YOU FUCKSTICK,,,,,,,,,,DO I LOOK LIKE I SPEAK FROG?,,,,,,,,,,IT WAS THE EVIL BROWN GUYS WITH BOXCUTTERS,,,,,,,,,,,THE TV WOULD NEVER EVER LIE TO ME,,,,,,,,,BUSH TOLD ME THE EVIL BROWN GUYS HATE OUR FREEDOMS,,,,,,,,,,,AND THE EVIL BROWN GUYS WITH BOXCUTTERS,,,,,,,,,,WERE THE MOST BESTEST PILOTS EVER,,,,,,,,,,THEY MADE ALUMINUM GLIDE SEEMLESSLY THROUGH MASSIVE STEEL GIRDERS WITH NO REACTION AT ALL,,,,,BROWN GUYS WITH BOXCUTTERS ARE THE EVIL ONES!

  • @bigbopper993

    Congratulations, your still a canadian fucktard.

    Too bad your Mouth crap doesn't make sense. The airliners were STOPPED

    From 500 mph, to ZERO, in 200 Feet. That implies they didn't glide

    Seamlessly (note the spelling) through massive girders.

    Brown guys can be JUST as ignorant as any Hillbilly.

    YOU are a great example.

  • @Merlin5x5 oh merlin you silly little fuckstick,,,,,,grow up man,,,,,,,i am talking about the impact wall,,,,,,you know where there was no impact,,,,,on the impact wall,,,,,,,where there was no impact,,,,,,an aluminum plane seemlessly slid through a massive steel mesh of girders,,,,,,,,with no reaction from the plane at all to the steel,,,,,,hqhahahahahaha,,,,,­,so in your world aluminum can cut neat little holes in steel and then decide to break up and explode after the steel wall,,,u r fucked!

  • @bigbopper993

    Anytime you can tell me how a 160 Ton Airliner at 500 mph can be stopped in 200 Feet, without hitting a steel mesh of girders, you Let me know.

    In the meantime, I will let MIT's crash lab try to train your ignorant ass.

    WTC, HOW THE AIRPLANE WINGS CUT THRU THE PERIMETER WALL

    T. WIERZBICKI and X. TENG, "How the airplane wing cut

    through the exterior columns of the World Trade Center",

    MIT Impact and Crashworthiness Lab Report #75,

    March, 2002

  • @Merlin5x5 The argument does not make sense until you explain how the airliners in question were able to attain 400 knots at sea level. I was wondering if you could just look at that evidence and explain in a rational way how an airliner can reach speeds of 400 knots at sea level. You should start at the Boeing website. Good luck with that.

  • @bigbopper993 Tu es le roi des 'fuqstiques'... mais tu ne peux echapper du sac du papier... Voudrais tu faire un debat de face-a-face? :) Ou est-ce que tu aimerais mieux sucer mon grand dard? Fais une decision, s'ill te plait. Aussi... pourquoi est-ce que ton acte conteint... absolutement pas humour ou comedie? Cette est une enigme et la rends perplexe. Vrai, vrai.

    Tu vis en Canada... pourtant tu ne parles pas Francais?? tch tch tch!

  • @bigbopper993

    Yup, it's preposterous to believe that 9/11 conspirators could hide evidence

    for 10 years, and that there are still ASSHOLES who want to bitch about it.

  • @bigbopper993 YAAAAAH. HOORAAH. I'm with you brother. Those sneaky towel head bastards were able to make NORAD stand down for 82 minutes. We should wipe them all out. It might wipe us out financially, but whats a little money compared to security. 911 was an inside job.

  • @bigbopper993 and thats why u are a dumbass

  • @bigbopper993 stop shouting

  • @ivorbigonee soory but i get very passionate,,,,,just like on my standup comedy videos,,,,hahahaha,,,,,check em out!!

  • @ivorbigonee - You're lucky he's just shouting at you, he threatened to kill me in a PM yesterday. This is one ignorant, frustrated, fat dipshit.

  • @CTV911

    WOW, totally un traceable pilots in totally un traceable simulaters were not able to hit the 208 foot wide Twin Towers, but they were able to hit the runways that are often as small as 75 feet wide, while crabbing their aircraft, in a crosswind.

    Here is a reply to your unnamed source in this video. BULLSHIT!

  • @Merlin5x5

    Planes don't travel 550 MPH when landing.

  • @CTV911

    They also don't have the constant aim advantage

    the terrorists did. THEY did not have to worry about

    anything, not trim, nor wheels, nor approach angle,

    nor landing checklists. All they had to do was point.

  • @CTV911

    What do you think the tolerances are for aircraft position in the ILS Landing system?

    Pilots who don't have to land or take off, and who aren't following traffic control do what?

    Point the aircraft?

  • @CTV911

    PLUS, can I point out that MANDATORY touch and go airliner landings are done ONCE A MONTH by pilots, and yes, virginia, they go 500 mph when they do so.

    LOL

    You should ask your GAZILLIONS of pilots at Pilots4Twoof

  • @Merlin5x5 SORRY - planes on approach to land, even in a touch & go - DO NOT travel even near 500mph! Get a fucking clue!!! engineer/pilot!

  • @GtrDudeL

    UH, sorry, they actually DO, Dumbass.

    When an airliner / pilot does touch & go practice

    (Once a year) the Speed that must be maintained is V4

    (As the plane has to overcome descent inertia)

    wikipedia. org/ wiki/ V_speeds

    On a typical Boeing airliner, that's 90% of top speed,

    (mach 0.8), or around 0.7 of 720 mph at Sea Level.

    DO THE MATH, DUMBASS.

  • @Merlin5x5 NOPE - sorry V4 is NOT 500 MPH!! Its measured in knots not mph. V4 is NOT 90% of max air speed!!!!! Its rotation speed on TO! Touch and go's R NOW WHERE NEAR 500 MPH - and certianly NOT 720MPH! U'r wiki logic fails!

    Commercial airplanes DO NOT land or takeoff at .8-.9M!!! WTF?!? R U daft?? That would tear the airplane apart in the dense air at sea level!!

    Did the math - looks like U'r the dumbass! btw - I'm a structural engineer in propulsion @ boeing!

  • @GtrDudeL

    V4 is the Steady assent speed. At 0.7 of Mach 1 at Sea Level (720mph), it's 504 mph, DUMBASS. V4 is NOT Rotation speed, as I told you, the plane has to overcome descent inertia; at takeoff, it has no descent inertia.

    The landing speed is NOT the touch and go speed, dumbass.

    Dense air doesn't tear airplanes apart at sea level, dumbshit.

    That's another Twoofer myth.

    Mach 0.8 is the PUBLISHED air speed of a boeing 757.

    MACH speeds compensate for air density.

    YOU are STUPID.

  • @GtrDudeL

    MANY IDIOTS don't understand MACH speeds, or V speeds, and if you are a structural engineer at Boeing, you should be FIRED for incompetence.

    From Wiki

    "So, an aircraft traveling at Mach 1 at sea level (340.3 m/s, 761.2 mph, 1,225 km/h) will experience shock waves in much the same manner as when it is traveling at Mach 1 at 11,000 m (36,000 ft), even though it is traveling at 295 m/s (654.6 mph, 1,062 km/h, 86% of its speed at sea level)."

  • @GtrDudeL

    The MOST obvious example, of course, is a carrier landing, where the pilots hit the THROTTLE to MAXIMUM as they land, in case they miss the wire, it breaks, or their landing gear folds on violent carrier landings.

    Now, don't you wish you new WTF you were talking about before you began your ignorant post?

  • @Merlin5x5 Dude - seriously U'r a fucking moron! U realize U R comparing a military jet to a commercial jet? HUGE differences in operating envelopes... geezus! U R the biggest idiot here!! Go back to watching 'top gun' and shut the fuck up!

  • @GtrDudeL DUDE, you are seriously IGNORANT about Planes. V Speeds are decision points and speeds. They are marked on the AIR SPEED indicator of every plane from a CESSNA to Boeing 747. THAT proves you have never sat in a pilots seat. As far as the cabin door sensors, you are right, they don't exist, but the DATA POINTS for them EXIST in every Boeing Jet FDR, since 1999. MANY Twoofers like you insisted they existed, until debunkers proved them wrong in 2004. HAHAHA, BIG FAIL, pussy.
  • @Merlin5x5 touching the gear to the ground at 500 MPH LMAO your funny

  • @NOMCCBAMA Well, if you feel so confident in that, why not search for Touch and Go landings here on YouTube? There are five or six here on youtube, and more than one tell you the speeds as they practice. The ones I have heard are announcing 450 mph as they hit the ground. Go ahead and look, because unlike you, I AM a pilot, for 30 years, and I know damn well what V1, V2, and V4 are for, what they mean, and why ANY plane has to touch and go at a HIGH % of max performance.
  • Merlin5x5 Before attempting to refute their claims. You should conduct your own simulator experiment using known pilots. So that we'd have something other than the word of a totally unknown untraceable self proclaimed expert consultant of the DOD to go on

    Like they did

    David Chandler's brilliant-Downward acceleration of the North Tower

    watch?v=32-Ctx7MhKY

    North Tower Exploding

    watch?v=hSApOavkHg8

    9/11: Blueprint For Truth

    watch?v=b74naeawdCs&feature=Pl­ayList&p=621A4B03C1169C78&inde­x=0&playnext=1

  • @NOMCCBAMA

    1. Debunkers defeated DavidRChandler's video post here on Youtube THREE YEARS ago, when he first posted it.

    2. NOTE your video doesn't show OUTWARD movement of debris until AFTER the collapse starts, NOT BEFORE IT, like in explosives use in CD.

    3. The OBVIOUS BULLSHIT of your claims is simply proven by YOUR lack of duplication. In NINE years, none of you have

    3.1 Blown up a core column

    3.2 CUT a core column with thermite

    3.3 Shown the world explosive debris

    Who needs to LOL?

  • @Merlin5x5 debunked? Why haven't you pointed me to that video?

    What's this?

    9/11: Total Proof That Bombs Were Planted In The Buildings!

    watch?v=8n-nT-luFIw

    9/11: EXPLOSIVE TESTIMONY EXCLUSIVE-Niels Harrit-Chemist.m4v

    watch?v=0lU-vu2JvZY

    9/11: EXPLOSIVE TESTIMONY EXCLUSIVE Mark Basile Chemical Engineer.m4v

    watch?v=JZNQq7XBLwc

  • @NOMCCBAMA Because not all proof in the world is in the form of YouTube videos, MORON. Your OTHER posts were debunked long ago. 1. NO ONE has ever presented Bomb Debris from the WTC towers. No Bomb debris, no bombs. 2. Neils Harrit, is NOT a chemist, he is a PART TIME physics professor in a college. Go take a LOOK at his thermitic report, and call up PROVO, UTAH 411. "S&J Scientific", the lab on the cover, never existed in PROVO. It's actually a UPS MAILBOX by the airport. LOL
  • @Merlin5x5 sure so where is it So that we'd have something other than the word of a totally unknown untraceable self proclaimed expert consultant of the DOD to go on

  • @NOMCCBAMA

    Well, GEE, SuperGenius. IT DOESN'T EXIST.

    "S&J Scientific" is just a semi retired BYU chem

    professor who "Borrows" BYU equipment.

    That's his cell phone, on the cover page of the

    report. That's his PICTURE on page 22 of the

    report, working in his GARAGE "laboratory".

    Call the number, speak to him yourself.

    He usually answers in the evening.

    I called him, why don't you?

  • @Merlin5x5 WTC1: Witness to explosion before plane hit, new footage watch?v=I2uKVfQDrJw

    Explosions? I thought it was a supposedly a pancaking collapse. And a leaning tower! 1:15 Why didn't it fall over ?

  • @NOMCCBAMA The WTC towers were the MOST instrumented buildings in NYC. Maybe you don't remember they were attacked in 1993. Those buildings, sensors, alarms, cameras, etc, were all monitored from the PANY admin center, by the Hudson river, so they survived the attacks. They record NOTHING before the airplanes hit. The NYC police received no calls before the airplanes hit, and SO, your nonsense is easily disproven by public records. ANYTHING else you want to try?
  • @Merlin5x5 If you were on the inside planting bomb you might of had access to that as well. I think I'm going to believe the actual film footage that someone hasn't been able to tamper with

  • @NOMCCBAMA And NORAD did not fail America 4 times on the same day

  • @NOMCCBAMA

    SOLLY CHOLLY, people on the inside planting bombs would have had to go through a maze of instrumented doors, security cams, lock sensors, elevator cams, and monitored access panels monitored by PANY, the NYC police and fire department. ANYTHING in the core of the building sets off alarms.

    Big fail there, Kooktard.

    NORAD is not even tasked to respond to hijackings, Dumbass. It did, but it didn't have to. It's NOT authorized to fire on civilian airliners, even NOW.

  • @Merlin5x5 You mean that the "North American Aerospace Defense Command" which "provides advanced warning of impending missile and air attacks against its member nations, safeguards the air sovereignty of North America, and maintains airborne forces for defense against attack." was impotent? Just take your 30 shekels and do what you do quickly

  • @NOMCCBAMA DID YOU DENY ANYTHING I SAID? Nope. I realize George Bush ripped your manhood away from you with his response to the 9/11 attacks, But don't use your faggot moron existence as an excuse for your cowardice. The 9/11 attacks were conducted by an enemy of the united states who assumed americans like you would be too weak kneed to respond to an attack by the same terrorists that did the USS COLE attacks, and the ORIGINAL WTC attacks. They were right about YOU, not me.
  • @NOMCCBAMA Maybe your ignorance would need a simpler question. What did you expect an air intercept by NORAD to do? Shoot down a civilian airliner over two of the MOST densely populated cities on earth? How would that be better? What's the part of SUICIDE ATTACK you don't understand? Did you expect them to pull over and give up when a jet pulled up alongside? This is NOT dragnet, or the 1950s. Boeing 767s don't pull over very well.
  • @Merlin5x5

    (REMOVE SPACES)

    prisonplanet. com/articles/december2006/1412­06trafficcontroller. htm

    EAT SHIT LOW LIFE

  • @NOMCCBAMA

    Why not stop beating off to conspiracy websites and go straight to the NTSB data?

    WTC, BOEING, NTSB DATA, ALL FLIGHTS

    ntsb.gov/info/foia_fri.htm

    WTC, BOEING, NTSB RECORDED RADAR TRACKS, ALL 911 AIRLINERS

    ntsb.gov/info/Rec_Radar_%20Dat­a_%20Study_all%20_aircraft.pdf

  • @Merlin5x5 Your brainwashing never cease. Does it?

    No explosives huh?

    What's this at :58 watch?v=oTx20dzVMtE

    OBJECT EJECTED by EXPLOSION BEFORE WTC COLLAPSE

  • @NOMCCBAMA

    Nope, never brainwashed by conspiracy websites. MY mind is more powerful than yours.

    My Dog's mind is more powerful than yours.

    My Brick has a mind more powerful than yours.

    JUST FYI, Most explosions in the world do NOT involve Explosives.

    The NIST and FEMA reports document a lot of explosion events, as

    you would expect in a giant skyscraper on fire.

    Ho hum, wanna try for the "most stupid truther" on earth prize?

  • @Merlin5x5 When you're truly brainwashed, you don't know it. What substance would be stored in a office building potent enough to send an object flying through a window? If fire ignited the explosion. Why isn't smoke billowing from the blown out window afterward? I have one last question for your superior troll mind. What keeps you coming back here?

  • @NOMCCBAMA OH, that's such a simple question, let's make a list.

    1. Transformer fire and explosion. The WTC towers had more

    transformers than a medium sized city.

    2. Steam boiler fire and explosion. More steam boilers than

    3. Compressed Propane tanks for the LOCAL water heaters.The WTC used

    compressed Propane for large water heaters on every other floor.

    4. Compressed air tanks kept on engineering floors.

    5. Diesel fuel for data center UPS and emergency power.

    There is a long list!

  • @NOMCCBAMA

    Second, Why isn't smoke blowing out from the blown out windows?

    Because a 15 mph breeze was blowing from northeast to south, and

    the smoke column was on the SOUTH side of the buildings, DUH

    Third, what keeps me coming back to here?

    Because I am an engineer, and I want to keep a respect for reality,

    and engineering facts. Watching truthers destroy common engineering

    experience with FUCKTARD BULLSHIT, made me laugh, and want

    to make sure people saw REAL engineering. LOL.

  • @Merlin5x5 "Because a 15 mph breeze was blowing from northeast to south, and

    the smoke column was on the SOUTH side of the buildings"

    Then why is there smoke billowing from the building just 5 or 10 floors above the ejection?

    "Because I am an engineer,"

    Your just a low life troll

  • @NOMCCBAMA

    I NOTICED you didn't challenge my posted facts to you, and just started bitching and whining, like a typical Pussy Canker sore.

  • @NOMCCBAMA He (Merlin5x5) has sold his soul. It's quite simple. We don't have the particulars with regard to what he was promised but that makes no difference. Those who believe in the government's assertions are about to have a very rude awakening. Mark these words. Within 415 days, the reality that Merlin5x5 knows will be turned on its head and he will have to deal with the knowledge that everything he has ever believed to be true was a lie, like the moon landing.

  • @Daddyo930 Why are you convinced it will come in 415 days?

  • @Merlin5x5 That's an excellent idea. Be sure to note that the official speeds of whatever hit the buildings was over 400 knots. If you can explain how a commercial airliner can do over 400 knots at sea level then you win fair and square and you will get no further argument from me. However, until you can explain how a Boeing 747, 757, 767, 777, or 787 can achieve speeds of over 400 knots at sea level then Houston, "We have a problem"

  • @NOMCCBAMA

    Congratulations on doing such a good job of "research", that I can debunk your entire report with a 411 phone call to directory assistance, and by calling the phone number on the cover of the thermite report you cite.

    Boy, that sure took an effort.

  • @Merlin5x5 YOU ARE SUCH A FUCKSTICK DOUCHEBAG MERLIN,,,,,,,,WHAT DO YOU FIGURE CAUSED THE MOLTEN METAL FOR MONTHS AND MONTHS UNDER ALL THREE DEMOLISHED TOWERS,,,,,,,,,WAS IT A RED BANDANA,,,,,,,,,OR MAYBE IT WAS A BOXCUTTER?

  • @bigbopper993

    There was no molten metal for months and months.

    NASA did the AVIRIS IR photography at the WTC Plaza just two days later.

    They revealed no part of the plaza went over 800 C, that's 700 C LOWER

    than molten steel, and 1700 C Lower than thermite / thermate.

    WTC, WTC HOT SPOTS NEVER GOT OVER 800 C

    pubs. usgs. gov/of/ 2001/ofr-01-0429/ thermal. r09. html

  • @Merlin5x5 wtc hotspots never got over 800 degrees,,,,,,,,,hahahahaha,,,,­,,,,now i know you just make shit up for little giggles to yourself,,,,,,,,,what the fuck is wrong with you,,,,,,,,,,hopefully you die in the next fake attack,,,,,,,,,,and your family believes the fabricated bullshit story that the media and government will have for them!

  • @bigbopper993

    YUP, no WTC plaza spots over 800 C, just two days after the attacks.

    Here are the IR pictures and calibrated data maps.

    WTC, WTC HOT SPOTS NEVER GOT OVER 800 C

    pubs. usgs. gov/of/ 2001/ofr-01-0429/ thermal. r09. html

  • @Merlin5x5 quote "WOW, totally un traceable pilots in totally un traceable simulaters were not able to hit the 208 foot wide Twin Towers, but they were able to hit the runways that are often as small as 75 feet wide, while crabbing their aircraft, in a crosswind."... The official NIST speeds were around the 500 mph range ( above the structurally safe speeds for these aircraft at that low altitude). You're a private pilot but overlooked the difference between that and approach speeds?

  • "The present safety factor for metallic aircraft structures is generally 1.5".

    Source: ("A reliability-based safety factor for aircraft composite structures", 1993, vol. 48, no4, pp. 745-748 (8 ref.) Kidlington, ROYAUME-UNI.)

  • @Merlin5x5 This guy only lets those whom he agrees with comment on his channel. Now that's a real american. You just dont understand flight dynamics and the effect of turbulence on aircraft. Otherwise this video might have given you some much needed perspective.

  • @Merlin5x5 OK, so its all bullshit, fine. Then just explain how a commercial airliner does over 400 knots at sea level Mr. Engineer. You did say that you were an engineer? Then you should have no trouble explaining this.

  • @Daddyo930 Step on the accelerator?

  • @rickyseabra That's what they would do in fantasy land. Just step on the accelerator. Boeing does not design airliners that can achieve 400 knots at sea level. Impossible.

  • they were not at sea level..they were at tower level...but you are right, control of an aircraft that low is very difficult at high speeds...so how'd they hit the towers with so little room compared to that huge wingspan, in all that turbulence, with no decent training and no experience...and what would be the motive for pilots to lie? What is in it for them? aside from crap like this from people like you? who benefited? follow the money/benefits like you would in any other scenario.

  • @Merlin5x5

    You're obviously not a good listener! Watch again and listen properly before making silly commnets like your last one! They said they could hit it at landing speeds but not at the speed it was actually travelling at, which was past its safe operating speed. In theory the plane should have broken into pieces before it hit the tower due to the stress of flying faster than it's operating speed. Do the maths dude!

  • Dont forget that all these so called hijackers were right into the alcohol and drugs, totally averse to their religion, especially with a 'holy' purpose. So if these guys were going real hard on the drugs and on the piss the night before. These dudes end up being freak pilots that can do anything, especially doing everything right, which included OPENING the cabin door on Flight 77 without setting off the Flight Recorder. Amazing skills for people who 'could barely fly'..let alone 'fingertip'

  • @UTubeFreeMind Hate to break it to you, but the cabin door wasn't open for 40 hours, since the APUs started on Sunday. Maintenance records show it was NEVER opened. SO, the cabin door sensor was NEVER connected. As for the Terrorist Pilots flying well, maybe that has to do with 3 years of training, 40 hours of BOEING simulators, and motivation. MAYBE you are just an idiot who has never been a pilot, or even gotten close to a commercial pilot's license. That's more likely, huh?
  • @Merlin5x5 cabin door sensor? WTF - there is NO cabin door sensor! The is a positive locking feature - NO sensor! U R a FUCKING IDIOT! NOW SHUT THE FUCK UP!!!

  • @NeMelScotsCunt

    No, you read it correctly. Your betting is wrong.

    I live in Las Vegas, and have a little more experience at it.

    LOL

    After all, I have traveled to your country, because people

    value my skills, and I have seen your nation puking on the

    sidewalks before they pass out there in Glasgow.

    It's a pathetic fate for a once great country.

  • @Merlin5x5 Oh by the way Merlyboy, have your heard?

  • and these pilots , did not have to be in a state of approaching DEATH, as the hijacker would have been ,

  • @canaan1967 hehe,, i have seen him on jewish anti palestine sites, making more of his moronic comments, he is a self certified ZIONIST, which then explains his bias, and his zeal for regurgitating fox news bullshit. just though to share the info. peace.....

  • They have already set up the FEMA camps to throw sexual deviants like Mersexdwarf5dollarlove into.

  • @canaan1967 LOL, Kooktard. I am a pilot, dumbass. FIVE of the 19 Terrorists had COMMERCIAL PILOTS LICENSES. They don't hand those out as favors. I am willing to BET that you can't muster the time or money, IQ or patience to become a PRIVATE PILOT. Commercial certs require at least THREE certs involving a COMPUTER exam, a VERBAL exam, and an FAA inspector's personal checkout. EACH. SO, you are basically a delusional Faggot. Get used to this.
  • @MerShillFraud5^x5^  Where's the extensive presentaion for Bjorkman and Co??? .....Wanker!!

  • @canaan1967

    They had 40 hours of training on Boeing flight simulators.

    TWO of the four had this, Hani Hanjour and Al Ghamdi.

    That's documented by the FBI PENTBOMM investigation.

  • @Merlin5x5 They had 40 hours of training on Boeing flight simulators. Aye paid for by the CIA , Why do the Scots make you feel so insecure ? Let me know about Mobile Phones 2001 ! Why did the bottom floors just blow away on WTC7 ? How did they ID the planes ? When did passports become more resilient than Black Box's ? Have you ever heard of Bannock burn ? You are an amusement Tony , just a few wee questians , very simple ! Yet you somehow feel slander is proof ? You may need help ! FannyBaws