You know i feel for the Americans. It was really sad what happened. Butt why am i seeing so many vids whit so much proof en nothing is being done about it. Its time for the American people to stand up again. Don't let people who are in " higher" positions then the other people rule. People have to come together an be one again. The governments have ruled long enough. Its our time. That's what is happening in the middle east. If the American army stayed out of the 9/11 would never happen.
Idk why I watched this. I cant watch anymore 9/11 vids its makes me so angry than99% of this country doesnt give a dam about evidence. How the hell are these people even alive being so outrageously stupid?
The US Governments "9/11 Conspiracy Theory" violates basic high school physics and the following Laws of Nature: -Galileo's Law of Falling Bodies Violated -Newton's First Law of Motion Violated -Newton's Third Law of Motion Violated -Laws of Thermodynamics #1 (The Law of Conservation of Energy) Violated -Laws of Thermodynamics #2 (The Law of Increased Entropy) Violated.
At 3:38 you can see the top of the tower falling over, its plain as day. If that was the "pile driver" then how did it right itself in a couple of seconds and continue str8 down? Impossible, Angular momentum, conservation of momentum, absent. That huge chunk should have been lying off to side of the collapsed heep. There were no forces working upon it to cause it to disintegrate, right, where did it go? Poof, Its so obvious, cant believe people actually try to support NIST, its a crime.
(cont) accelerate a mass of 2.2 lbs(1 Kg) one meter per second per second (m/s-2) 220,000 tons (440 million lbs) of structure or 200 million kilos. 10 mill kilos per sec = 10 mill Newtons (Nf) Impossible!! So where is the reaction from the structure (action) below the collapsing top? It is absent, the math doesnt work, the physics dont work, the official story doesnt work. You cant debunk Newtons 3rd law. Its mathematically undebunkable. There was little resistance, gravity dont account for it.
All the evidence I will ever need. Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. Now, for all the brainwashed people; I will give the collapse of WTC1, 20 seconds, more than ample time from any video evidence introduced so far. Thats 11 stories every 2 secnds. Go find an 8-11 story building and stand next to it. Look up and count to 2. It has to fall to the ground in that amount of time, 2 seconds. Physically impossible, period. Using calculations based on Newtons force required to accelerate
"Alien Scientist" seems to be unaware either of black-body radiation (the flame temperature controls the color: orange is around 1200 C, which means that steel exposed to it within can be THAT temperature), or buckling instability, which initiates SILENTLY, or fire progression (it moves to fresh uncovered combustible material) and you follow him with the brain of a guillotine victim
CAPS R 4 the instruction of morons, or anyone who appoints himself spokesperson 4 a science he doesn't understand
If anyone viewing this has never watched, "Loose Change", I highly recommend it! I've been convinced since the first hint of conspiracy that the whole 9/11 tragedy was completely staged by our government. Not to mention the fact that all of the rubble was IMMEDIATELY removed...yes...I'm saying ALL evidence from one of the most heinous crimes in American history was REMOVED from the scene of the crime! "Loose Change" pulls it all together with scientific evidence, video and commentary.
a brother of my sister in law was one of the first responders. Im not allowed to even BREATHE of any conspiracy surrounding 9/11. If I do I'm sure I'd be shunned from the family because he is such a hero and they think it's being disrespectful. I of course am not trying to be disrespectful, just wish they would see the truth.
It's amazing how the mind can build seemingly rational concepts to contradict blatant TRUTH! Even if the government said they blew the building up, debunkers would still have theories contradicting it as if they know. The real problem is the possibility of the governmental system in which they place so much belief, is collapsing before their eyes. We're being lied to and it's proven daily. Thnx AlienScientist for sharing the truth. Don't cast your pearl b4 swine....Please.
While I find this all interesting I have some problems with these InfraCam images. If that is indeed the same model as the one used to take these pictures, there are several problems. The Extech IRC57 InfraCAM cannot read temperatures in excess of 350°C. If this is the same model as those pictures, none of those pictures matter. Also, these pictures have to be taken pretty far away, at least 1,500 ft. While I cannot find any info on the matter, I would think that range would give false results.
@blite13 wait, you doubt that the Al Qaida had the ability to sabotage a public U.S. building but they were able to hijack 4 separate planes on the same day? Do you honestly think that they werent organized and capable?
@jebwatson Yes, I KNOW that a guy in a cave and a laptop could not have created what happened on 9/11. And where did I ever say that some guys with boxcutters could steal 4 airliners on the same day and fly them into targets, by eyeballing them, as a plausible scenario? Guys who could hardly fly a Cessna eyeballed targets and hit them with expert precision. I guess you believe that Osama was sitting in that chair watching a $10 Tv in a dump of a room, watching himself, right? IDIOT.
I hope a day, a rich guy will rebuild WTC and buy 2 planes (remote at distance) and will remade the scene in a desert place (Same construction, same fuel quantity, all same) And we will see what will hapenned ! Im pretty sure that will not collapse!
What a well-thought-out, interesting, well-researched and well-ordered video. Thank you very much to the uploader for all the hard work and for the finished result. It can indeed be difficult and time-consuming chasing small pieces of pro-Truth evidence all over YouTube/elsewhere, and to have so many well-argued facts packaged together like this is an invaluable resource. I have always thought the WTC was demolished, but wondered how - and excellent videos like this help to answer the question.
there were some firemen waiting around for no reason about a half hour before the planes were "hijacked", and a police man actually knew about it, and told the people to run for their lives 5 min. before the planes hit, i have no idea what happened to him, either he died in the event, or something else... sad to see that the world is covered in lies, regardless of who's side is lying :(
3:11 holy shit, that's is fucking high.. it's not on the top i think but seriously, think about those people who committed suicide on that day.. jumping from that high.. so sad that this happened.
You don't have any proof that this thermo chemical shit brought down the building. All you've got are scenarios that would make your bias explanation true.
@only2percent Yes, because they had better video editing equipment than we do now in 2001. I'm sure the government also told 4.5 million New Yorkers to act in shock as the worst act of terrorism on American soil was taking place. lol fucking idiot
@austinmoore97 So your "no way all those people could be fooled" wipes away all the evidence that shows the 9/11 commission report is a joke? FACTS little man, that trumps all your, "it just couldn't happen and my TV is right", BS.
I have a job thank you! lol And how is that related to what I said? And a bomb seems more likely to cause this kind of collapse, rather then the segment that is about 1/8 the size of the building. You really think that could cause a chain reaction all the way down and just happens to knock out the rest of the world trade center building. No I don't believe third world countries are capable of this kind of homework!
@futuregreens A bomb took down the WTC? It is estimated by demolition companies that it would take over a month of working 24 hours a day setting up the explosive power to bring down those towers. And how you do that with 40,000-15,000 people in the buildings at almost every hour a day doesn't seem that practical to me... And the 'third world' people who planned this act have a higher education than probably 95% of Americans, you profiling fuck. get a life
@austinmoore97 If you do your research, you will know that a "major overhaul" was done to the elevators from early 2001 to mid 2001. You would also learn that testimony says there were evacuation drills, a power down weeks before 9/11. Port Authority had there own working elevator in the towers and only they had access to it. They had the means to do the work. To believe a guy in a cave with a laptop ordered some guys from Saudi Arabia with boxcutters to take over military pilots ...ya sure.
@Denierbud11 Did I say it was the Port Authority that made the Towers come down like that? Of course I DIDN'T. I'm saying whoever did it, had the ability to use the Port Authority elevator all day, every day for the preperation. Do you need me to change your diaper as well? You have poopy pants, little one? Port Authority could have easily been used as a cover for those who did it. I know, it's an impossible scenario, right? No way that could happen in this straight up world, right? Get a clue.
so some group, other than the port athority, used their elevators all day every day, and then all these port authority employees died, and not one port authority employee has come forth to blow the whistle
I guess there is no need for proof in your delusional life
I remember that day! When the planes hit no one thought they would fall. Did it not take us all by suprise that they did fall? Did anyone think on that day before they fell that they where going too fall. Did it take us all by surprise that people from a third world country succeeded with this attack! But the idea of our goverment being involved with this is just absurd. Call me a conspiracy nut and i will call you a coward or misinformed. And the only way to shut me up is to kill me! 333
bias? toward the truth. I'm not sure that counts as bias. thanks for posting. the more one looks into this, the more obvious it becomes it was a total inside job.
9. why was thick black smoke exiting the WTC towers ...?
[A] This is because, at the locations where the actual burning is taking place, the oxygen is severely depleted
... At these lower temperatures, the soot could no longer burn away. Thus, people saw the thick dark smoke characteristic of burning under oxygen-depleted conditions.
NIST - Answers to Frequently Asked Questions (August 30, 2006)
Great video -- Thanx! NIST's dismissal of thermite as a possible/potential demolition means due to its inappropriateness for making vertical cuts is incredibly specious, yet another red flag of concerted duplicity & cover-up in support of the official narrative. I strongly suspect nano-thermite gel was used as a structural coating to accomplish coordinated weakening -- either as a fireproof upgrade refit OR applied during initial construction, for which there is some anecdotal, heresay evidence.
ive been watching these 9/11 physics videos for a bit now and i guess the only question i have now is this, what the fuck are we going to do about it now?.. the way i see it we only have 2 options.. continue to take it up the ass, or, 2) give fema a reason to open up their 500+ deathcamps.
sad part is that itll be the "blue list" americans that prohibit any revolution... you WILL die before the revolution.
So what you're saying is that there was thermite burning and yet the indicated temperature was 100° C? On the outside, ok, but didn't you just show a shot of sparkles of possible thermite right on the edge of the building, i.e. on the outside? How does that go together? And how much of thermite had there be and why nobody noticed?
@MrPierrePhilippe excuse me for being ignorant. your stating that a egg would not go through a .5 inch thick drywall (gyprock) without crushing until it went through the other side thereby leaving a egg shape hole? FINE i AGREE. I also agree that point is IRRELEVENT as what is relavent is wether a egg could go through the drywall "WHILE" CRUSHING while at the sametime leaving a egg shaped hole. the timing of your perception sequences are slightly disfigured im thinking?
i lost all my friends for trying to convince them of the truth, it was really weird, as soon as i started saying "i've seen evidence, it's ridiculous, let's tell everyone" i was shunned from my group and made fun of. people have so much faith in the establishment that anybody who says something like this is automatically a weirdo. i also tried to convince them that the economy is a load of bullshit and we don't need money, but again i was the stupid one... i now have only 2 friends...
9/11 doesn't mix with social circles. I have lost a few friends, but I've met some of the most amazing people in the world through this movement. (as well as some of the most abominable people)
South Park and the mainstream media have done a lot to make 9/11 socially taboo, and it's very effective propaganda. The Public Relations experts and social engineers know about and understand this phenomena well.
@romanianskill -Hell i would rather lose a couple friends because they can't accept the truth. It would be better than most not even caring either way.
@romanianskill Those are your real friends. A wise man told me once that I would be fortunate indeed if I could count my friends on one hand. Keep the faith because you know deep in your heart that you are right. When the day comes, be not arrogant with the truth. Be kind to those that were misled for we may need them in the future. In 409 days, you will be suprised by what happens. The wicked will suffer for their transgressions. Be strong. Be humble.
@romanianskill Keep waking people up no matter what, let truth be your friend, the war launched of 911 has the potential to become world war three, like I said, let truth be your new friend, peace.
@romanianskill They were never really your friends in the first place if the shunned you for you views. My own family thought I was mad as a hatter a few years ago, not now though, things are changing fast, more and more people are starting to get it.
i understand you . and it is sad to see that most of this wourld as we now it does not have the brain power to connect all the imformaton out there . i rate this 10 out of 10 ..
having only 2 true and intelligent friend means more than having dozens of so called friends who dont listen to you. u r better off,follow ur heart and believes than surface-people
That's your entire game. Take this mountain of evidence, ignore the forest through the trees, and focus only on one specific piece of evidence at a time, twist and distort that mighty oak into a piece of straw, and pretend to break through them one at a time... I have much better things to do with my time than to waste it trying to educate stubbornly ignorant fools who don't want to listen... The Media Censors this information, so I don't feel bad censoring you.
@AlienScientist i agree with alot of the logic your using. except its in our best interest if i challenge what i feel are the weaker points within your logic. 1: this HEAT SENSOR used to detect the HEAT. you seem to have alot of FAITH in the SENSOR readings. you position it as one of the TRUTH-POINTs that supports your LOGIC thereafter. i find your logic thereafter rushed. i find the focus you directed on this ladies sensor readings weak. you create your point as if these readings r law
NIST was recently forced to release the full thermogram video that was filmed that day. You can view it here: watch?v=_CK2WAH78Ew
Truth does not fear investigation, and I am simply trying to get to the truth of what really happened on 9/11. I encourage people to investigate every aspect of 9/11 including every claim that I make or put forward in any of my videos. Yes these videos may be a bit of a crash course, and there is plenty more that needs to be addressed.
@AlienScientist The compliance and complacency of the American people is astounding! Responders are still dying today and now the government tells them that in order to get health benefits, they have to confirm that they are not terrorists! This is how your government treats you. While your constitution and civil rights are being destroyed, the TSA gropes your groins and treats you as terrorist when it is the government who are the terrorists committing illegal wars for profit and gain.
@AlienScientist Good video! The fact is that 9/11 is no longer debatable. There is so much evidence that there has been a cover up by the government, so many ommissions, contradictions in the NIST report that it demands a real investigation and not done by those with vested interests. We don't ask for a reinvestigation but demand one from the mafia government. It really is surprising to me how people still refuse to see that their government is corrupt. There is no democracy in America.
"Random fires and random damage from 'plane impacts' [as if this is a common occurance] can only cause random failures not symmetrical damage".
Where in the world do you come up with this nonsense? I have never heard a scientist talk in these types of absolutes (except when trying to bolster another conspiracy theory). So answer this: if it were controlled demolition, then who flew planes into the buildings? What planes were they? What happened to the flights that took off that day? Hmm?
Where do ALL structural failures occur at? They only occur at the weakest point in a structure. The plane that hit the South Tower impacting the southeast corner. Why then did columns fail symmetrically and nearly simultaneously on the opposite side of the building where columns were left un-damaged by the plane impacts?
My argument is perfectly logical given what we know about all historical structural and mechanical failures. Was it not?
@AlienScientist The columns did not fall symmetrically, not even close. The top part of the tower dramatically keeled off to one side at the point of collapse. Which backs up your point about structural failure. Though your application is simplistic given the multiple stress points, the enormous amount of trauma caused by the plane, and structural weakening caused by the intense heat. Again, I continually wonder about the use of absolute terms like "perfectly logical" from Truther posts.
Yes, and then it pulverized into dust in mid-air with no mechanical forces to explain why it did this... The stress points on the opposite side of the building would have been the least effected by this top portion of the building falling to one side, given your theory that impulse momentum transfer caused a series of mechanical failures at each floor.
Furthermore there is the issue of squibs, or high speed lateral ejections blasting out the sides of the building:
@AlienScientist LOL, the whole BUILDING didn't get pulverized into dust. This whole dust business is another red herring. You think hundreds of tons of metal and concrete collapsing upon itself won't create a lot of "dust"? I have no theory, I have video evidence of how the building collapsed. But if you are referring to the "pancake" effect, then yes, the combined weight of the collapsed portions had a cascading effect. If you consider the geometry, lateral ejections are a natural outcome.
Look up "Bucket Brigades"... 90% of the WTC concrete was pulverized into complete dust and was removed in 5 gallon buckets! One FDNY member is quoted as saying the biggest piece of identifiable office furniture he found was half a telephone keypad.
We also have video evidence, proving how the building was demolished:
watch?v=Do0LsY4MDWg
watch?v=ZMnTGieS9Hk
If you consider the velocity of the lateral ejections, there is no natural explanation. These buildings were BLOWN UP!
@AlienScientist Al, you think that explosives that were embedded in steel girders destroyed all the office equipment? Sigh. Do an experiment. Drop a rock or a concrete block from 20' onto a similarly hard surface. Let me know the biggest chunks. Then extrapolate for the heights debris fell from the WTC towers. There are thousands of pages of official reports from NIST, 9/11 commission, FEMA, and you're referring me to YT vids? Seriously? Balancing evidence, I don't agree there was an explosion.
Here's a video addressing the "experiments" you are telling me to do:
watch?v=9YRUso7Nf3s
Please try to wrap your head around the rather elementary physics concepts required to understand what you are talking about...
Yes, I have videos going over all the errors in the NIST Report for the people that don't have the time to read and go through themselves. Please check all the relevant pages discussed:
@AlienScientist LOL, you and warcrimes the same person? First vid does little to recreate the collapse scenario in the tower, as it shows a single column of support. What it does show though is the destruction of a concrete block from a 12 ft fall. Thanks for confirmation of how material was pulverized in the collapse. Re the second vid, ask yourself a question: isn't blg 7 collapse incidental to the hypothesis? The damage was done, politically, by the collapse of the towers. Blg 7 was a detail.
Please tell me where this shows pulverization? The dust at the WTC was much finer than a few chunks of broken up concrete. It was pulverized to particles on the average of 50 microns in diameter. It left a dust cloud that stretched to New Jersey and could be seen on NASA satellite. Fine dust covered the streets for many blocks around lower Manhattan, and the clouds released were enormous. Do you realize how much energy that takes? Where did that energy come from?
@AlienScientist Al, you saying that a thermite-charged CD was the only way to create dust? Drop a concrete block off the top of a 110 story building--guarantee it turns into dust. It's this type of tendentious and orthogonal logic/reasoning that renders so much of the conspiracy theories virtually irrelevant. Step away from the dust for a moment. You are so tied up in microns you're completely missing the forest for the trees. Try answering my question about why blg 7 needed to be demolished.
In order for the building to accelerate at near free fall speed, this means that all the building's gravitational potential energy is being converted directly into kinetic energy. That leaves very little to NO energy left over to account for the entire pulverization of the building. Dropping a block 110 stories still won't pulverize concrete to such a degree as was observed on 9/11. This type of plain hard science, renders the official story completely false.
@AlienScientist "This type of plain hard science, renders the official story completely false." Alien, I've actually sort of enjoyed our discussion up to this point, but it's absolute and absurdist statements like these that causes disengagement from the conversation. The pulverization was caused by the pancaking and cascading effect of the collapse as each subsequent floor gave from the combined downward pressure of the ones above. You still haven't answered my question on Blg 7.
Put your physics where your mouth is! PROVE that this is how the concrete was pulverized. I have links to energetics calculations in the description of this video, please check the math and provide me with your own corrections. It's only because I know the physics and did the math that I can make such absolute statements.
Give me 1 reason that Al Qaeda and Bin Laden had to demolish WTC 7, and I'll give you 10 that the Bush Administration, CIA, and Wall Street had! Please...
@AlienScientist It's been interesting chatting with you. What you need to do is prove explosives caused the pulverization. Which you cannot since you have NO idea what ALLGEGED explosives were used, what were the ALLEGED quantities, in what ALLEGED proximity they were planted, etc, ad nauseam. Given that you cannot prove that, your math needs to be peer-reviewed (not by "Truther" mathematicians), and I strongly suspect it would not make it past the first round (and I am being polite).
The energetics alone PROVE that explosives caused the pulverization. You completely missed the entire point... NIST was never peer reviewed and my analysis demolishes your illusion of a scientifically sound explanation for why the towers collapsed.
Math is either right or wrong, it doesn't matter what the mathematician believes... Anyone can check the math. I'm done arguing with NON-Scientists who don't have a clue about physics... Keep lying to yourself and making up excuses!
@AlienScientist I have watched the videos you have recommended, and I believe responded to most of your questions. You clearly have done research, and that is to be commended. But again, step away from the dust and understand something critical. This is a geopolitical problem, not a math problem. You must address the geopolitical issues otherwise the math is basically meaningless. So again, explain why blg 7 needed to be demolished. This is YOUR proposition. It needs to be supported. Please.
Math is not meaningless... calling it "truther math" is meaningless, and shows you have no place arguing this issue scientifically.
If you want to argue geo-politics try researching PNAC and Operation Northwoods, read "confessions of an economic hitman" by John Perkins and "The Grand Chessboard" by Brzezinski I also recommend Tarpley's "Synthetic Terror" and Michael C. Ruppert's "Crossing the Rubicon".
My proposition is supported 1000 times over! You've been pwned, now get lost!
@AlienScientist Oh Alien. Nobody got owned, except you by choosing to censor. Which is understandable given the specious nature of virtually all your supporting information. I've read "Confessions", and am familiar with other works. I too am highly skeptical of the motives of big gov't, but this one doesn't fit in too many ways. I'll leave you and your channel(s) alone, because you're clearly not up for the debate. The less you engage in the dialectic the more close-eyed you become. Good luck.
There's 3 pages of debate on this forum for everyone to go back and read through... LOL I am censoring you because you are wasting my time. First you play the deny and make excuses game for three pages, now you try weasel in with the "No man, I'm on YOUR side" garbage... Give me a break... A skeptical approach to the "specious nature" of the Official Theory falls apart way easier than any of the arguments I've made... You can pretend to break twigs one by one all day...
@bman342 i have to throw in a small comment here. As an engineer, i know that bulding designs include 'factor of safety' basically designed in excess of requirements. While im not completely sold on either side of the fence, it strikes me as very odd that as the floors fell, they did not slow at all. especially with the loss of mass due to pulverising. lower floors are built to carry even higher loads than the floors above. The fact that it was an instant collapse also strikes me as odd.
@slickstrings -- Good point; Just to add the additional 'oddity' of WTC 2's straight-down instantaneous collapse despite the core damage being limited to the SE side (as the video points out). Also, I didn't know that the stream-gob flows of bright-yellow molten-metal recorded falling from the damaged NE corner was attributed to nano-thermite ignited by the aircraft's engines. IMHO, this is FAR more likely than the ludicrous claim by NIST re: molten aluminum from melting engine parts.
@starmanskye If you have ever seen molten aluminium, it doesnt glow at all. Its almost like murcury. or blobs of metallic gun metal paint. molten steel glows orange. Thats what ive seen anyway.
How can you call yourself a scientist and compare the burning of the Windsor tower with the WTC towers? Did a fully-fueled passenger jet flying at peak speed slam into the Windsor tower? Do you know the structural framework and the materials used, are you honestly asking WHICH burned hotter because a nighttime picture of the WT looks kinda bright?!? Seriously?? This is why people do not listen to you whacknuts. Stop saying thing like "couldn't possibly" and start doing some real research.
The fires in the Windsor Tower were a raging inferno which burned for over 20 hours. Part of the building even collapses and you can watch it happen on video to see the physics and dynamics of how it collapses. It looks nothing like the controlled demolitions we observed on 9/11.
No, actually the reason people don't listen to this is because they are weak and can't handle the truth... they are also socially and mentally conditioned to be stubbornly ignorant and not think.
@AlienScientist I will ask again. Did a fully fueled large passenger jet, flying at peak speed slam into the Windsor Tower? Was the Windsor Tower the exact same structural framework of the WTC towers? Were the conditions even close to being similar enough to infer congruence? Before continuing to say controlled demolition, you need to provide proof (besides the kindergartenesque "it looked like it"). We eagerly await proof of controlled demolition, though we're not holding our breath.
Please, debunkers are gasping for air, never mind holding their breath...
You're creating a weak straw man by setting up conditions that can't possibly be met. I never said the collapses needed to be identical, I was arguing the issue of structural failures of steel in various fire temperatures, and the fact of the matter is that Fire cannot possibly do this to a building. The burden of proof is on you to prove that it can. So far NIST has failed terribly.
@AlienScientist NIST has no burden to respond to you and the rest of the Truthers. They have failed at nothing. Listen, and listen good, you cannot argue structural integrity, steel or otherwise without factoring in an outside agent travelling at 500mph that massively compromised the structural integrity. Fire was NOT the only component of the structural failure, it was also that little detail of the plane. Though now I wonder if you're one of those nutjobs who believes there was no plane(?).
Fire WAS the primary reason given by NIST for the cause of the collapse, and furthermore Building 7 was NOT hit by a plane. NIST did have the burden to respond to us through continued efforts at FOIA inquiry and requests for disclosure of evidence which they fought against vigorously and lost.
That is why they were ultimately forced to release 3 terabytes of data to us. Please do not follow up a straw man with another (No Planes)...
Yawn. So based upon "evidence" of one of two thermographs of a handheld infrared camera you're building your whole case for controlled demolition? You realize of course that those were pictures (excuse me, thermographs) of external heat radiation (thermography only reflects surface heat). And was also a snapshot not a longitudinal reflection of temperatures. Kevin Ryan is a looney, UL does not certify structural steel. "Scientists" like you who talk in absolutes doesn't understand science.
No because people were standing in the impact holes and we have thermograms which disprove the Official myth of raging infernos taking down these buildings. This is why the Windsor Tower is a good example to use, since it was completely engulfed in fire and still did not fully collapse.
ASTM does certification. UL performed tests for NIST, they lied, and Kevin Ryan blew the whistle... Stop getting your info from CIA run debunking websites, and try doing some real research.
@AlienScientist Kevin Ryan is certifiable. He blew the whistle on nothing. The thermograms prove nothing. It's astounding that you call yourself a scientist and are willing to declare that this is unmitigated proof of CD. Your examples are so completely disconnected. No, YOU try doing some real research rather than this anomaly-based nonsense. Find documents, find witnesses, find paper trails, receipts, recordings of conversations, SOMETHING. You have zippo, and THAT's why no one's listening.
It's astounding that you can denounce the fact that Kevin Ryan was fired as a result of a letter he wrote to NIST. The Center For International 9/11 Studies recently forced NIST to release 3 Terabytes of Data, We have already gone through and found clear evidence for explosives and controlled demolition.
I also have another big surprise waiting to come out. We've done quite a bit of research into all those things you mentioned and found rich sources of information...
Lol this is always a good one "why use planes?". I really hope this isn't the only thing keeping you from the truth. It's called an alabi, it's pretty hard to tell everyone that terrorists were able to plant military grade nano thermite(accelerant) without being caught
Thanks for showing everyone how ignorant you are on the subject. NO PLANE hit WTC 7, and it fell down at free-fall acceleration. The people who understand this video actually took physics unlike you. Anything falling at free-fall requires all its enegy, and has no left over energy to destroy or place force on anything. Otherwise that would be RESISTANCE, and couldn't happen in free-fall.
No plane hit WTC7, Your argument is a complete fail...
1) the temperature of the smoke billowing out of the window is not the same as the temperature of the fire.
2) The building was structurally compromised before the fires. Don't compare it to undamaged buring buildings. The intent, presumably, was for them to topple on impact.
3) When one corner collapses, the rest are put under a loading condition for which they weren't designed, ON TOP OF the burning and compromise.
4) The WTC had been bombed. If there were bombs, why bother w/plane
Your logic makes me laugh. The WTC towers were built with a 20:1 redundancy. They could displace massive amounts of damage. Even the designers of the WTC said it could withstand multiple impacts of planes @ watch?v=sO1JxpVb2eU. NIST publicly said the plane damage wasn't that major, and that the collapse was rather due to fire. Furthermore another WTC Constructor Charlie Thornton commented in 1988 on the impossibility of a Jet Airliner bringing down a WTC Tower. @ watch?v=p8Z_X8xgrF8
"The FBI's counterterrorism division concluded that the evidence presented by the [Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth] deserves FBI scrutiny. In a letter, Deputy Director Michael J. Heimbach assessed that the group's analysis is "backed by thorough research and analysis."
Please watch - Zero (A Nobel Prize Winner's 9/11 Documentary) @ watch?v=ofXKiXNDDYA
and AE911Truth's Blueprint for Truth @ watch?v=b74naeawdCs
Many US Counter-Terrorism and Intelligence Agent Veterans Challenge the Official Account of 9/11: "a Cover-up," "a Joke" "Terribly Flawed," "Laced with Contradictions,"
On Jun 5-2006 author Ed Haas contacted the Federal Bureau of Investigation headquarters to ask why, while claiming that bin Laden is wanted for multiple events, but not 9/11!
Rex Tomb, Chief of Investigative Publicity for the FBI responded, The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Osama bin Ladens Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11. Tomb continued, Bin Laden has not been formally charged in connection to 9/11
Members of the 911 Commission said it was a cover up. They were not allowed to look at a large amount of the evidence, and they had higher ups choosing what evidence they could see or not. Also over 41 US counter terrorism veterans agree that it is a cover up and inside job.
Senator, Max Cleland openly complains about how he was barred from seeing much of the evidence used to make the official story. He is outraged. Source of his CNN interview @ watch?v=LWE58Z5evgw
Many US Counter-Terrorism and Intelligence Agent Veterans Challenge the Official Account of 9/11: "a Cover-up," "a Joke" "Terribly Flawed," "Laced with Contradictions,"
Please watch - Zero (A Nobel Prize Winner's 9/11 Documentary) @ watch?v=ofXKiXNDDYA
If you care about America, and the world, you really need to watch the movie Zero. It has many interviews with US government personnel exposing the events.
I don't know what destroyed wtc 7 Im not sure if it was fire but It seems impossible it was a controlled demolition because someone would of noticed something and it impossible for them all to be covering it up and wtc7 didn't fall at freefall speed it came down at half that rate of a normal controlled demolition some the honest answer is I don't know
Fair enough I just don't see the logic that's all In the goverment blowing them up just to attack Iraq and aghasistan or whatever but all well cause will never know
the first half is about how 9 hijackers are still alive, but to answer your question/ void your statement, (no disrespect), at 2:10 listen to what the video creator says, "What justification do we have for bombing Afghanistan" and then continue to watch the video and listen to Carl Schwarz. He explains why the government wants to takeover the middle east. Thank you
On Jun 5-2006 author Ed Haas contacted the Federal Bureau of Investigation headquarters to ask why, while claiming that bin Laden is wanted for multiple events, but not 9/11!
Rex Tomb, Chief of Investigative Publicity for the FBI responded, The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Osama bin Ladens Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11. Tomb continued, Bin Laden has not been formally charged in connection to 9/11
Members of the 911 Commission said it was a cover up. They were not allowed to look at a large amount of the evidence, and they had higher ups choosing what evidence they could see or not. Also over 41 US counter terrorism veterans agree that it is a cover up and inside job.
Senator, Max Cleland openly complains about how he was barred from seeing much of the evidence used to make the official story. He is outraged. Source of his CNN interview is posted above.
* Undeniable - 100% Proof of Molten Steel and Explosives. @ watch?v=8YaFGSPErKU
Neither fires nor a collapse could create molten steel. Even NIST admitted that the temperatures needed to create molten metal and merge steel together - could not have happened due to the official explanation of the collapse
Debunkers skip what they cannot explain:
A straight forward video of NIST discussing this, and the irrefutable evidence of Molten Steel. I hope you actually check into both sides of the debate
A Boeing 737 could of easily destroyed the twin towers witch they did there's no conspiracy by the way is there a conspiracy out on how michael Jackson died if so Id like to hear it
Thanks for showing us how ignorant you are on the subject. WTC 7 was not hit by a plane and feel down as well at free-fall acceleration as admitted by the National Institution of Standards and technology.
Explain how a collapse that required compression could take place in a state of freefall, on a building that wasn't hit by a plane - it was taller than the tallest building in most of the US states.
I mean the official explanation for the collapse of WTC is so preposterous, I'm surprised they didn't just implode the entire pentagon and blame it on the "plane crash". Even of plane could demolish such huge structures, please explain what destroyed Tower 7. thanks!
* 41 U.S. Counter-Terrorism and Intelligence Agency Veterans Challenge the Official Account of 9/11: "a Cover-up," "Terribly Flawed," "Laced with Contradictions," "a Joke"
SOURCE: PatriotsQuestion911.(com) - Remove ()s to view link
Zero (by a Nobel Prize Winner) @ watch?v=ofXKiXNDDYA
-----------------------------------
* 84% of New Yorker's Reject the Official 9/11 Story - Saying there is a Cover Up.
In 2006 CBS and NY Times ran an extensive poll with these results@
* 41 U.S. Counter-Terrorism and Intelligence Agency Veterans Challenge the Official Account of 9/11: "a Cover-up," "Terribly Flawed," "Laced with Contradictions," "a Joke"
SOURCE: PatriotsQuestion911.(com) - Remove ()s to view link
Zero (by a Nobel Prize Winner) @ watch?v=ofXKiXNDDYA
-----------------------------------
* 84% of New Yorker's Reject the Official 9/11 Story - Saying there is a cover up.
In 2006 CBS and NY Times ran an extensive poll with these results@
Many of the members of the 911 Commission said it was a cover up. They were not allowed to look at a large amount of the evidence, and they had higher ups choosing what evidence they could see or not. Also over 41 US counter terrorism veterans agree that it is a cover up and inside job
Senator, Max Cleland openly complains about how he was barred from seeing much of the evidence used to make the official story. He is outraged. Source of his interview is posted above
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
LOL, He shows a picture of the Building raging on fire, and he has the balls to say it wasnt hotter than 220 F. Thats like a really hot day in California. I mean just for me, looking at that building raging on fire, I know just by being a human and adult that the temperature is also hotter that 220F. What an idiot this kid is. And why are people listening to him, hes a retard. He doesnt think the buildings could collapse without a "Miracle" because of his Probabililities. What a loser.
Edna Cintron was identified as the woman standing in the impact hole waving for help.
How could a woman be standing there if there temperatures were anywhere NEAR hot enough to weaken steel?
If you think that 220F is a really hot day in California, I think you need to check the Farmer's Almanac and see when the hottest day actually was and what temperatures it got to... You clearly have absolutely no idea what you are talking about...
@AlienScientist Your right AllenScientist. I forgot that you have proven that fshe was a fake person...and that the fireball and fires around her were......what,,,,hotter ,colder thannn...WHAT>...what are you saying...that she is not really standing their....or that it was COLD inside the building......Maybee it wasnt very hot were she was standing,,,but it was hot were the fires were burning....The Nist report shows that the TEMPS at that spot were not to hot to survive....
@AlienScientist Well youve done it....through that brilliant piece of reasoning youve proven SUPER, NANO, ULTRA Thermite was really used........Yep, they planted bombs at that exact floor......Then smashed a plane into the same spot.....somehow the explosives survived the plane impact and fires for an hour.....then at the designated hour....BUsh lit the fuse......or pushed the button.......soooo retarded....and you call yourselfan AlienSCientist. what about that one. huh
for one thing that bldg in Madrid is constructed different, and I think the most contributing factor to the collapse of the wtc's, was the plane impact themselves, it had to be a tremendous amount of force expelled into the bldgs over several floors, when you have a 250k lb plane full of 10k gallons of fuel going 500 mph
same way people survive building fires. just because theres a fire in one part of the building doesn't mean its on fire in another part. But eventually, it will spread.
happens all the time in chicago. Sometimes the firedept is too late, and those people die from smoke, then their bodies get burned
polachek is a lot smarter than the guy who made the video. First he claims 200 degrees and later changes it to 400. And buildings don't collapse from fire. ROFL.
@taledarkside Nice straw man argument. Now try explaining where enough energy to pulverize a 110 story building came from. Ohhh....of couse!!! It was an office fire! I should have known better. lol
@taledarkside Thank you for the correction. I forgot to mention the steel beams which were ejected hundreds of feet by a "gravitational collapse." It's funny how gravity was 1000 times more powerful beneath the WTC than in any other place on earth. =D
Dangg Ur smart n obviously correct
Yoana2005 2 days ago
Most people will take it as an act of terrorism. That is the mindset we have in America, from all the mind control bullshit they input on T.V.
dclipe 2 days ago
Yes i agree with you but wat if the thermal pics tht carol lady wer fake?
thegdawg1234 2 days ago
@EpicWin1997 No, wouldn't you want to know who actually murdered someone you know?
mryoto123 3 days ago
Conspiracy theories insult everyone who's lives ended or were effected by 9/11.
EpicWin1997 3 days ago
@EpicWin1997 what really happened is an insult to everyone!
dclipe 2 days ago
Pretty good vid !!! Kudos
djdoall30 4 days ago
You know i feel for the Americans. It was really sad what happened. Butt why am i seeing so many vids whit so much proof en nothing is being done about it. Its time for the American people to stand up again. Don't let people who are in " higher" positions then the other people rule. People have to come together an be one again. The governments have ruled long enough. Its our time. That's what is happening in the middle east. If the American army stayed out of the 9/11 would never happen.
Wish187bone 4 days ago
you are smart. i didn't like your video about lazar, but this video is pretty genius, props
kGmusicpage 1 week ago
Idk why I watched this. I cant watch anymore 9/11 vids its makes me so angry than99% of this country doesnt give a dam about evidence. How the hell are these people even alive being so outrageously stupid?
BaByUzii 3 weeks ago in playlist More videos from AlienScientist
this is a great video! this should be shown to all students k through 12 as education into how the system really works.
thebluetarp 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The US Governments "9/11 Conspiracy Theory" violates basic high school physics and the following Laws of Nature: -Galileo's Law of Falling Bodies Violated -Newton's First Law of Motion Violated -Newton's Third Law of Motion Violated -Laws of Thermodynamics #1 (The Law of Conservation of Energy) Violated -Laws of Thermodynamics #2 (The Law of Increased Entropy) Violated.
4truthjusticefreedom 1 month ago
megamogx 4 months ago
At 3:38 you can see the top of the tower falling over, its plain as day. If that was the "pile driver" then how did it right itself in a couple of seconds and continue str8 down? Impossible, Angular momentum, conservation of momentum, absent. That huge chunk should have been lying off to side of the collapsed heep. There were no forces working upon it to cause it to disintegrate, right, where did it go? Poof, Its so obvious, cant believe people actually try to support NIST, its a crime.
babybluesnowden 4 months ago
(cont) accelerate a mass of 2.2 lbs(1 Kg) one meter per second per second (m/s-2) 220,000 tons (440 million lbs) of structure or 200 million kilos. 10 mill kilos per sec = 10 mill Newtons (Nf) Impossible!! So where is the reaction from the structure (action) below the collapsing top? It is absent, the math doesnt work, the physics dont work, the official story doesnt work. You cant debunk Newtons 3rd law. Its mathematically undebunkable. There was little resistance, gravity dont account for it.
babybluesnowden 4 months ago
All the evidence I will ever need. Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. Now, for all the brainwashed people; I will give the collapse of WTC1, 20 seconds, more than ample time from any video evidence introduced so far. Thats 11 stories every 2 secnds. Go find an 8-11 story building and stand next to it. Look up and count to 2. It has to fall to the ground in that amount of time, 2 seconds. Physically impossible, period. Using calculations based on Newtons force required to accelerate
babybluesnowden 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
awesome 10 out of 10
markhopod 5 months ago
"Alien Scientist" seems to be unaware either of black-body radiation (the flame temperature controls the color: orange is around 1200 C, which means that steel exposed to it within can be THAT temperature), or buckling instability, which initiates SILENTLY, or fire progression (it moves to fresh uncovered combustible material) and you follow him with the brain of a guillotine victim
CAPS R 4 the instruction of morons, or anyone who appoints himself spokesperson 4 a science he doesn't understand
beachcomber2008 5 months ago
If anyone viewing this has never watched, "Loose Change", I highly recommend it! I've been convinced since the first hint of conspiracy that the whole 9/11 tragedy was completely staged by our government. Not to mention the fact that all of the rubble was IMMEDIATELY removed...yes...I'm saying ALL evidence from one of the most heinous crimes in American history was REMOVED from the scene of the crime! "Loose Change" pulls it all together with scientific evidence, video and commentary.
kharmablue1 5 months ago
a brother of my sister in law was one of the first responders. Im not allowed to even BREATHE of any conspiracy surrounding 9/11. If I do I'm sure I'd be shunned from the family because he is such a hero and they think it's being disrespectful. I of course am not trying to be disrespectful, just wish they would see the truth.
msdksl 5 months ago
It's amazing how the mind can build seemingly rational concepts to contradict blatant TRUTH! Even if the government said they blew the building up, debunkers would still have theories contradicting it as if they know. The real problem is the possibility of the governmental system in which they place so much belief, is collapsing before their eyes. We're being lied to and it's proven daily. Thnx AlienScientist for sharing the truth. Don't cast your pearl b4 swine....Please.
jibaritobueno 5 months ago
While I find this all interesting I have some problems with these InfraCam images. If that is indeed the same model as the one used to take these pictures, there are several problems. The Extech IRC57 InfraCAM cannot read temperatures in excess of 350°C. If this is the same model as those pictures, none of those pictures matter. Also, these pictures have to be taken pretty far away, at least 1,500 ft. While I cannot find any info on the matter, I would think that range would give false results.
bayouboyy 6 months ago
An insane cult who actually attack sciene itself to allow you to masturbate to your favorite conspiracy theory. Morons.
SammyHales 6 months ago
Richard Gage AE911TRUTH will be giving a presentation at Cambridge University UK,on Sat 18th June..full details on the featured video on my channel.
cappucinokid100 7 months ago
@blite13 wait, you doubt that the Al Qaida had the ability to sabotage a public U.S. building but they were able to hijack 4 separate planes on the same day? Do you honestly think that they werent organized and capable?
jebwatson 8 months ago
@jebwatson Yes, I KNOW that a guy in a cave and a laptop could not have created what happened on 9/11. And where did I ever say that some guys with boxcutters could steal 4 airliners on the same day and fly them into targets, by eyeballing them, as a plausible scenario? Guys who could hardly fly a Cessna eyeballed targets and hit them with expert precision. I guess you believe that Osama was sitting in that chair watching a $10 Tv in a dump of a room, watching himself, right? IDIOT.
blite13 8 months ago
I hope a day, a rich guy will rebuild WTC and buy 2 planes (remote at distance) and will remade the scene in a desert place (Same construction, same fuel quantity, all same) And we will see what will hapenned ! Im pretty sure that will not collapse!
SnaggaSheeYoung 9 months ago
how would they hide the wires in a demo? I would be suspicious if I saw all these wires attached to boxes or cylinders.
ImSoOffended 9 months ago
What a well-thought-out, interesting, well-researched and well-ordered video. Thank you very much to the uploader for all the hard work and for the finished result. It can indeed be difficult and time-consuming chasing small pieces of pro-Truth evidence all over YouTube/elsewhere, and to have so many well-argued facts packaged together like this is an invaluable resource. I have always thought the WTC was demolished, but wondered how - and excellent videos like this help to answer the question.
NellJSmith 9 months ago
there were some firemen waiting around for no reason about a half hour before the planes were "hijacked", and a police man actually knew about it, and told the people to run for their lives 5 min. before the planes hit, i have no idea what happened to him, either he died in the event, or something else... sad to see that the world is covered in lies, regardless of who's side is lying :(
ibnakhal 10 months ago
3:11 holy shit, that's is fucking high.. it's not on the top i think but seriously, think about those people who committed suicide on that day.. jumping from that high.. so sad that this happened.
widu33 10 months ago
Brilliant presentation, sir.
GuyMagicFingers 10 months ago
You don't have any proof that this thermo chemical shit brought down the building. All you've got are scenarios that would make your bias explanation true.
austinmoore97 10 months ago
@austinmoore97 but then again, the NIST's proof was shot down by multiple sources, not just this guy, and all of them are actually reliable
ibnakhal 10 months ago
Where did You see an airliner? ... Here?
Frame-by-frame penetration of the South Tower:
watch?v=6fhWdzXKvfQ
Or, maybe, You can supply us with 9/11 video, that is not fake:
9/11 TV broadcasts were fake. Forensics support the evidence:
watch?v=exXlDqzKi5w
One can currently use Photoshop to identify a doctored video. The video above tells you how.
Fake "3D"animations now used on a regular basis in place of real news footage.
FAKE video about Libya protests
watch?v=oLXlD4BXJZE&feature=feedbul
only2percent 11 months ago
@only2percent Yes, because they had better video editing equipment than we do now in 2001. I'm sure the government also told 4.5 million New Yorkers to act in shock as the worst act of terrorism on American soil was taking place. lol fucking idiot
austinmoore97 10 months ago
@austinmoore97 So your "no way all those people could be fooled" wipes away all the evidence that shows the 9/11 commission report is a joke? FACTS little man, that trumps all your, "it just couldn't happen and my TV is right", BS.
blite13 9 months ago
I have a job thank you! lol And how is that related to what I said? And a bomb seems more likely to cause this kind of collapse, rather then the segment that is about 1/8 the size of the building. You really think that could cause a chain reaction all the way down and just happens to knock out the rest of the world trade center building. No I don't believe third world countries are capable of this kind of homework!
futuregreens 11 months ago
@futuregreens A bomb took down the WTC? It is estimated by demolition companies that it would take over a month of working 24 hours a day setting up the explosive power to bring down those towers. And how you do that with 40,000-15,000 people in the buildings at almost every hour a day doesn't seem that practical to me... And the 'third world' people who planned this act have a higher education than probably 95% of Americans, you profiling fuck. get a life
austinmoore97 10 months ago
@austinmoore97 If you do your research, you will know that a "major overhaul" was done to the elevators from early 2001 to mid 2001. You would also learn that testimony says there were evacuation drills, a power down weeks before 9/11. Port Authority had there own working elevator in the towers and only they had access to it. They had the means to do the work. To believe a guy in a cave with a laptop ordered some guys from Saudi Arabia with boxcutters to take over military pilots ...ya sure.
blite13 9 months ago
@blite13
the port authority had more members die this day then in its history, so you think they murdered their own?
Denierbud11 8 months ago
@Denierbud11 Did I say it was the Port Authority that made the Towers come down like that? Of course I DIDN'T. I'm saying whoever did it, had the ability to use the Port Authority elevator all day, every day for the preperation. Do you need me to change your diaper as well? You have poopy pants, little one? Port Authority could have easily been used as a cover for those who did it. I know, it's an impossible scenario, right? No way that could happen in this straight up world, right? Get a clue.
blite13 8 months ago
@blite13
so some group, other than the port athority, used their elevators all day every day, and then all these port authority employees died, and not one port authority employee has come forth to blow the whistle
I guess there is no need for proof in your delusional life
Denierbud11 8 months ago
@austinmoore97 They had nine months before 9/11 happened.
CabinHill83 9 months ago
U think the terrorists dint do there homework? They may well have planted bombs in the towers, or evn on the planes (highly unlikely) get a job
TheYounoob 11 months ago
I remember that day! When the planes hit no one thought they would fall. Did it not take us all by suprise that they did fall? Did anyone think on that day before they fell that they where going too fall. Did it take us all by surprise that people from a third world country succeeded with this attack! But the idea of our goverment being involved with this is just absurd. Call me a conspiracy nut and i will call you a coward or misinformed. And the only way to shut me up is to kill me! 333
futuregreens 11 months ago
bias? toward the truth. I'm not sure that counts as bias. thanks for posting. the more one looks into this, the more obvious it becomes it was a total inside job.
wonkeaux 11 months ago
Great information.
Unfortunately, I can't use this video, because your bias is obvious.
I understand completely why you are biased, so am I.
But ONLY unbiased, peer-reviewed evidence will convince the unconvinced.
smujismuj 1 year ago
mind CONTROL
[]
9. why was thick black smoke exiting the WTC towers ...?
[A] This is because, at the locations where the actual burning is taking place, the oxygen is severely depleted
... At these lower temperatures, the soot could no longer burn away. Thus, people saw the thick dark smoke characteristic of burning under oxygen-depleted conditions.
NIST - Answers to Frequently Asked Questions (August 30, 2006)
[]
So, what caused the DEMOLITION of WTC 1 ?
bIZAROsPRMN11 1 year ago
@slickstrings and where is this molten perimeter collumn from the southtower? I have never seen this column after collapse? This would be the answer!
74pbg 1 year ago
Great video -- Thanx! NIST's dismissal of thermite as a possible/potential demolition means due to its inappropriateness for making vertical cuts is incredibly specious, yet another red flag of concerted duplicity & cover-up in support of the official narrative. I strongly suspect nano-thermite gel was used as a structural coating to accomplish coordinated weakening -- either as a fireproof upgrade refit OR applied during initial construction, for which there is some anecdotal, heresay evidence.
starmanskye 1 year ago
@starmanskye- What was that security team doing for months up until a few weeks before the attack...I wonder?
ifeelfine90 1 year ago
ive been watching these 9/11 physics videos for a bit now and i guess the only question i have now is this, what the fuck are we going to do about it now?.. the way i see it we only have 2 options.. continue to take it up the ass, or, 2) give fema a reason to open up their 500+ deathcamps.
sad part is that itll be the "blue list" americans that prohibit any revolution... you WILL die before the revolution.
koolwalla 1 year ago
NIST stands for Never Investigated Super Thermite!!
wellifthemediasaysit 1 year ago
that s exactly the point; every one is familiar with an egg crashing on the floor.
But not with airliners crashing on big buildings.
Apply the same reasonning.
MrPierrePhilippe 1 year ago
So what you're saying is that there was thermite burning and yet the indicated temperature was 100° C? On the outside, ok, but didn't you just show a shot of sparkles of possible thermite right on the edge of the building, i.e. on the outside? How does that go together? And how much of thermite had there be and why nobody noticed?
ExClUr 1 year ago
These type of video's always attract big comments lol. Ill pread the word on your channel man.
cobolt13 1 year ago
In relation to your comment at 3:02 the building was probably made in china.
cobolt13 1 year ago
I dont understand,
If I show people the video of an egg going thru a 0.5 inch thick drywall (gyprock)
with the shell not crushing until after it whent tothe other side (leaving a hole with the shape of the egg);
every one would agree something is wrong, without any doubt.
Boeing in steel and concrete ? Same thing !!!!!!
MrPierrePhilippe 1 year ago
@MrPierrePhilippe excuse me for being ignorant. your stating that a egg would not go through a .5 inch thick drywall (gyprock) without crushing until it went through the other side thereby leaving a egg shape hole? FINE i AGREE. I also agree that point is IRRELEVENT as what is relavent is wether a egg could go through the drywall "WHILE" CRUSHING while at the sametime leaving a egg shaped hole. the timing of your perception sequences are slightly disfigured im thinking?
derpotni3riots 1 year ago
i lost all my friends for trying to convince them of the truth, it was really weird, as soon as i started saying "i've seen evidence, it's ridiculous, let's tell everyone" i was shunned from my group and made fun of. people have so much faith in the establishment that anybody who says something like this is automatically a weirdo. i also tried to convince them that the economy is a load of bullshit and we don't need money, but again i was the stupid one... i now have only 2 friends...
romanianskill 1 year ago 33
@romanianskill,
9/11 doesn't mix with social circles. I have lost a few friends, but I've met some of the most amazing people in the world through this movement. (as well as some of the most abominable people)
South Park and the mainstream media have done a lot to make 9/11 socially taboo, and it's very effective propaganda. The Public Relations experts and social engineers know about and understand this phenomena well.
AlienScientist 1 year ago 22
@AlienScientist try explaining a chemtrail
awakenlilrabbit 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@romanianskill you deserve to have no friends. everything has been debunked over and over again.
mdogpjm 1 year ago
@romanianskill you need better friends
Necronaut 1 year ago
@romanianskill -Hell i would rather lose a couple friends because they can't accept the truth. It would be better than most not even caring either way.
ifeelfine90 1 year ago
@romanianskill you mean three :) i know that corny but what ever
truckerguy72 1 year ago
@romanianskill you mean three :) i know that corny but whatever
truckerguy72 1 year ago
@romanianskill Those are your real friends. A wise man told me once that I would be fortunate indeed if I could count my friends on one hand. Keep the faith because you know deep in your heart that you are right. When the day comes, be not arrogant with the truth. Be kind to those that were misled for we may need them in the future. In 409 days, you will be suprised by what happens. The wicked will suffer for their transgressions. Be strong. Be humble.
Daddyo930 9 months ago
@romanianskill Keep waking people up no matter what, let truth be your friend, the war launched of 911 has the potential to become world war three, like I said, let truth be your new friend, peace.
YSBCITTAR 7 months ago
@romanianskill the truth is you only had two real friends to start with.. no loss really.
ejbh3160 5 months ago
@romanianskill They were never really your friends in the first place if the shunned you for you views. My own family thought I was mad as a hatter a few years ago, not now though, things are changing fast, more and more people are starting to get it.
SpeciesofNecessity 5 months ago
@romanianskill u never had more than 2 friends,u just didnt see it comin,..i learnd the same lesson,
and btw...u dont need em ;)
BongRasta 5 months ago
@romanianskill hey ,,what u exsperenced is what they want all others to think,,,but your awake,,,they arnt,,,cary on your education,,,and wait ,,,
johnny450gf 5 months ago
@romanianskill 2 is all you need:) i have two friends and both of them are genius people:)
TheDonhuan7 5 months ago
i understand you . and it is sad to see that most of this wourld as we now it does not have the brain power to connect all the imformaton out there . i rate this 10 out of 10 ..
markhopod 5 months ago
@romanianskill
no u have 3 now ...:]
salhawk 4 months ago
@romanianskill
having only 2 true and intelligent friend means more than having dozens of so called friends who dont listen to you. u r better off,follow ur heart and believes than surface-people
2009korte 1 month ago
@bman,
That's your entire game. Take this mountain of evidence, ignore the forest through the trees, and focus only on one specific piece of evidence at a time, twist and distort that mighty oak into a piece of straw, and pretend to break through them one at a time... I have much better things to do with my time than to waste it trying to educate stubbornly ignorant fools who don't want to listen... The Media Censors this information, so I don't feel bad censoring you.
AlienScientist 1 year ago 12
@AlienScientist i agree with alot of the logic your using. except its in our best interest if i challenge what i feel are the weaker points within your logic. 1: this HEAT SENSOR used to detect the HEAT. you seem to have alot of FAITH in the SENSOR readings. you position it as one of the TRUTH-POINTs that supports your LOGIC thereafter. i find your logic thereafter rushed. i find the focus you directed on this ladies sensor readings weak. you create your point as if these readings r law
derpotni3riots 1 year ago
@derpotni3riots,
NIST was recently forced to release the full thermogram video that was filmed that day. You can view it here: watch?v=_CK2WAH78Ew
Truth does not fear investigation, and I am simply trying to get to the truth of what really happened on 9/11. I encourage people to investigate every aspect of 9/11 including every claim that I make or put forward in any of my videos. Yes these videos may be a bit of a crash course, and there is plenty more that needs to be addressed.
AlienScientist 1 year ago 5
@AlienScientist The compliance and complacency of the American people is astounding! Responders are still dying today and now the government tells them that in order to get health benefits, they have to confirm that they are not terrorists! This is how your government treats you. While your constitution and civil rights are being destroyed, the TSA gropes your groins and treats you as terrorist when it is the government who are the terrorists committing illegal wars for profit and gain.
111RobinHood 5 months ago
@AlienScientist Good video! The fact is that 9/11 is no longer debatable. There is so much evidence that there has been a cover up by the government, so many ommissions, contradictions in the NIST report that it demands a real investigation and not done by those with vested interests. We don't ask for a reinvestigation but demand one from the mafia government. It really is surprising to me how people still refuse to see that their government is corrupt. There is no democracy in America.
111RobinHood 5 months ago
"Random fires and random damage from 'plane impacts' [as if this is a common occurance] can only cause random failures not symmetrical damage".
Where in the world do you come up with this nonsense? I have never heard a scientist talk in these types of absolutes (except when trying to bolster another conspiracy theory). So answer this: if it were controlled demolition, then who flew planes into the buildings? What planes were they? What happened to the flights that took off that day? Hmm?
bman342 1 year ago
@bman342,
Where do ALL structural failures occur at? They only occur at the weakest point in a structure. The plane that hit the South Tower impacting the southeast corner. Why then did columns fail symmetrically and nearly simultaneously on the opposite side of the building where columns were left un-damaged by the plane impacts?
My argument is perfectly logical given what we know about all historical structural and mechanical failures. Was it not?
AlienScientist 1 year ago
@AlienScientist The columns did not fall symmetrically, not even close. The top part of the tower dramatically keeled off to one side at the point of collapse. Which backs up your point about structural failure. Though your application is simplistic given the multiple stress points, the enormous amount of trauma caused by the plane, and structural weakening caused by the intense heat. Again, I continually wonder about the use of absolute terms like "perfectly logical" from Truther posts.
bman342 1 year ago
@bman342,
Yes, and then it pulverized into dust in mid-air with no mechanical forces to explain why it did this... The stress points on the opposite side of the building would have been the least effected by this top portion of the building falling to one side, given your theory that impulse momentum transfer caused a series of mechanical failures at each floor.
Furthermore there is the issue of squibs, or high speed lateral ejections blasting out the sides of the building:
watch?v=Ne1FJBVkh4s
AlienScientist 1 year ago
@AlienScientist LOL, the whole BUILDING didn't get pulverized into dust. This whole dust business is another red herring. You think hundreds of tons of metal and concrete collapsing upon itself won't create a lot of "dust"? I have no theory, I have video evidence of how the building collapsed. But if you are referring to the "pancake" effect, then yes, the combined weight of the collapsed portions had a cascading effect. If you consider the geometry, lateral ejections are a natural outcome.
bman342 1 year ago
@bman342,
Look up "Bucket Brigades"... 90% of the WTC concrete was pulverized into complete dust and was removed in 5 gallon buckets! One FDNY member is quoted as saying the biggest piece of identifiable office furniture he found was half a telephone keypad.
We also have video evidence, proving how the building was demolished:
watch?v=Do0LsY4MDWg
watch?v=ZMnTGieS9Hk
If you consider the velocity of the lateral ejections, there is no natural explanation. These buildings were BLOWN UP!
AlienScientist 1 year ago
@AlienScientist Al, you think that explosives that were embedded in steel girders destroyed all the office equipment? Sigh. Do an experiment. Drop a rock or a concrete block from 20' onto a similarly hard surface. Let me know the biggest chunks. Then extrapolate for the heights debris fell from the WTC towers. There are thousands of pages of official reports from NIST, 9/11 commission, FEMA, and you're referring me to YT vids? Seriously? Balancing evidence, I don't agree there was an explosion.
bman342 1 year ago
@bman342,
Here's a video addressing the "experiments" you are telling me to do:
watch?v=9YRUso7Nf3s
Please try to wrap your head around the rather elementary physics concepts required to understand what you are talking about...
Yes, I have videos going over all the errors in the NIST Report for the people that don't have the time to read and go through themselves. Please check all the relevant pages discussed:
watch?v=2V0WQFztLyg
watch?v=qFpbZ-aLDLY
AlienScientist 1 year ago
@AlienScientist LOL, you and warcrimes the same person? First vid does little to recreate the collapse scenario in the tower, as it shows a single column of support. What it does show though is the destruction of a concrete block from a 12 ft fall. Thanks for confirmation of how material was pulverized in the collapse. Re the second vid, ask yourself a question: isn't blg 7 collapse incidental to the hypothesis? The damage was done, politically, by the collapse of the towers. Blg 7 was a detail.
bman342 1 year ago
@bman342,
Please tell me where this shows pulverization? The dust at the WTC was much finer than a few chunks of broken up concrete. It was pulverized to particles on the average of 50 microns in diameter. It left a dust cloud that stretched to New Jersey and could be seen on NASA satellite. Fine dust covered the streets for many blocks around lower Manhattan, and the clouds released were enormous. Do you realize how much energy that takes? Where did that energy come from?
AlienScientist 1 year ago
@AlienScientist Al, you saying that a thermite-charged CD was the only way to create dust? Drop a concrete block off the top of a 110 story building--guarantee it turns into dust. It's this type of tendentious and orthogonal logic/reasoning that renders so much of the conspiracy theories virtually irrelevant. Step away from the dust for a moment. You are so tied up in microns you're completely missing the forest for the trees. Try answering my question about why blg 7 needed to be demolished.
bman342 1 year ago
@bman342,
In order for the building to accelerate at near free fall speed, this means that all the building's gravitational potential energy is being converted directly into kinetic energy. That leaves very little to NO energy left over to account for the entire pulverization of the building. Dropping a block 110 stories still won't pulverize concrete to such a degree as was observed on 9/11. This type of plain hard science, renders the official story completely false.
AlienScientist 1 year ago
@AlienScientist "This type of plain hard science, renders the official story completely false." Alien, I've actually sort of enjoyed our discussion up to this point, but it's absolute and absurdist statements like these that causes disengagement from the conversation. The pulverization was caused by the pancaking and cascading effect of the collapse as each subsequent floor gave from the combined downward pressure of the ones above. You still haven't answered my question on Blg 7.
bman342 1 year ago
@bman342,
Put your physics where your mouth is! PROVE that this is how the concrete was pulverized. I have links to energetics calculations in the description of this video, please check the math and provide me with your own corrections. It's only because I know the physics and did the math that I can make such absolute statements.
Give me 1 reason that Al Qaeda and Bin Laden had to demolish WTC 7, and I'll give you 10 that the Bush Administration, CIA, and Wall Street had! Please...
AlienScientist 1 year ago
@AlienScientist It's been interesting chatting with you. What you need to do is prove explosives caused the pulverization. Which you cannot since you have NO idea what ALLGEGED explosives were used, what were the ALLEGED quantities, in what ALLEGED proximity they were planted, etc, ad nauseam. Given that you cannot prove that, your math needs to be peer-reviewed (not by "Truther" mathematicians), and I strongly suspect it would not make it past the first round (and I am being polite).
bman342 1 year ago
@bman342,
The energetics alone PROVE that explosives caused the pulverization. You completely missed the entire point... NIST was never peer reviewed and my analysis demolishes your illusion of a scientifically sound explanation for why the towers collapsed.
Math is either right or wrong, it doesn't matter what the mathematician believes... Anyone can check the math. I'm done arguing with NON-Scientists who don't have a clue about physics... Keep lying to yourself and making up excuses!
AlienScientist 1 year ago
@AlienScientist I have watched the videos you have recommended, and I believe responded to most of your questions. You clearly have done research, and that is to be commended. But again, step away from the dust and understand something critical. This is a geopolitical problem, not a math problem. You must address the geopolitical issues otherwise the math is basically meaningless. So again, explain why blg 7 needed to be demolished. This is YOUR proposition. It needs to be supported. Please.
bman342 1 year ago
@bman342,
Math is not meaningless... calling it "truther math" is meaningless, and shows you have no place arguing this issue scientifically.
If you want to argue geo-politics try researching PNAC and Operation Northwoods, read "confessions of an economic hitman" by John Perkins and "The Grand Chessboard" by Brzezinski I also recommend Tarpley's "Synthetic Terror" and Michael C. Ruppert's "Crossing the Rubicon".
My proposition is supported 1000 times over! You've been pwned, now get lost!
AlienScientist 1 year ago
@AlienScientist Oh Alien. Nobody got owned, except you by choosing to censor. Which is understandable given the specious nature of virtually all your supporting information. I've read "Confessions", and am familiar with other works. I too am highly skeptical of the motives of big gov't, but this one doesn't fit in too many ways. I'll leave you and your channel(s) alone, because you're clearly not up for the debate. The less you engage in the dialectic the more close-eyed you become. Good luck.
MrBman705 1 year ago
@MrBman705,
There's 3 pages of debate on this forum for everyone to go back and read through... LOL I am censoring you because you are wasting my time. First you play the deny and make excuses game for three pages, now you try weasel in with the "No man, I'm on YOUR side" garbage... Give me a break... A skeptical approach to the "specious nature" of the Official Theory falls apart way easier than any of the arguments I've made... You can pretend to break twigs one by one all day...
AlienScientist 1 year ago
@bman342 i have to throw in a small comment here. As an engineer, i know that bulding designs include 'factor of safety' basically designed in excess of requirements. While im not completely sold on either side of the fence, it strikes me as very odd that as the floors fell, they did not slow at all. especially with the loss of mass due to pulverising. lower floors are built to carry even higher loads than the floors above. The fact that it was an instant collapse also strikes me as odd.
slickstrings 1 year ago
@slickstrings -- Good point; Just to add the additional 'oddity' of WTC 2's straight-down instantaneous collapse despite the core damage being limited to the SE side (as the video points out). Also, I didn't know that the stream-gob flows of bright-yellow molten-metal recorded falling from the damaged NE corner was attributed to nano-thermite ignited by the aircraft's engines. IMHO, this is FAR more likely than the ludicrous claim by NIST re: molten aluminum from melting engine parts.
starmanskye 1 year ago 2
@starmanskye If you have ever seen molten aluminium, it doesnt glow at all. Its almost like murcury. or blobs of metallic gun metal paint. molten steel glows orange. Thats what ive seen anyway.
slickstrings 1 year ago
ex US marine Ken O'keefe: Israeli Mossad on 9/11
watch?v=BcVTI09T5D4
TheFlex21 1 year ago
How can you call yourself a scientist and compare the burning of the Windsor tower with the WTC towers? Did a fully-fueled passenger jet flying at peak speed slam into the Windsor tower? Do you know the structural framework and the materials used, are you honestly asking WHICH burned hotter because a nighttime picture of the WT looks kinda bright?!? Seriously?? This is why people do not listen to you whacknuts. Stop saying thing like "couldn't possibly" and start doing some real research.
bman342 1 year ago
@bman342,
The fires in the Windsor Tower were a raging inferno which burned for over 20 hours. Part of the building even collapses and you can watch it happen on video to see the physics and dynamics of how it collapses. It looks nothing like the controlled demolitions we observed on 9/11.
No, actually the reason people don't listen to this is because they are weak and can't handle the truth... they are also socially and mentally conditioned to be stubbornly ignorant and not think.
AlienScientist 1 year ago
@AlienScientist I will ask again. Did a fully fueled large passenger jet, flying at peak speed slam into the Windsor Tower? Was the Windsor Tower the exact same structural framework of the WTC towers? Were the conditions even close to being similar enough to infer congruence? Before continuing to say controlled demolition, you need to provide proof (besides the kindergartenesque "it looked like it"). We eagerly await proof of controlled demolition, though we're not holding our breath.
bman342 1 year ago
@bman342,
Please, debunkers are gasping for air, never mind holding their breath...
You're creating a weak straw man by setting up conditions that can't possibly be met. I never said the collapses needed to be identical, I was arguing the issue of structural failures of steel in various fire temperatures, and the fact of the matter is that Fire cannot possibly do this to a building. The burden of proof is on you to prove that it can. So far NIST has failed terribly.
AlienScientist 1 year ago
@AlienScientist NIST has no burden to respond to you and the rest of the Truthers. They have failed at nothing. Listen, and listen good, you cannot argue structural integrity, steel or otherwise without factoring in an outside agent travelling at 500mph that massively compromised the structural integrity. Fire was NOT the only component of the structural failure, it was also that little detail of the plane. Though now I wonder if you're one of those nutjobs who believes there was no plane(?).
bman342 1 year ago
@bman342,
Fire WAS the primary reason given by NIST for the cause of the collapse, and furthermore Building 7 was NOT hit by a plane. NIST did have the burden to respond to us through continued efforts at FOIA inquiry and requests for disclosure of evidence which they fought against vigorously and lost.
That is why they were ultimately forced to release 3 terabytes of data to us. Please do not follow up a straw man with another (No Planes)...
AlienScientist 1 year ago
Yawn. So based upon "evidence" of one of two thermographs of a handheld infrared camera you're building your whole case for controlled demolition? You realize of course that those were pictures (excuse me, thermographs) of external heat radiation (thermography only reflects surface heat). And was also a snapshot not a longitudinal reflection of temperatures. Kevin Ryan is a looney, UL does not certify structural steel. "Scientists" like you who talk in absolutes doesn't understand science.
bman342 1 year ago
@bman342,
No because people were standing in the impact holes and we have thermograms which disprove the Official myth of raging infernos taking down these buildings. This is why the Windsor Tower is a good example to use, since it was completely engulfed in fire and still did not fully collapse.
ASTM does certification. UL performed tests for NIST, they lied, and Kevin Ryan blew the whistle... Stop getting your info from CIA run debunking websites, and try doing some real research.
AlienScientist 1 year ago
@AlienScientist Kevin Ryan is certifiable. He blew the whistle on nothing. The thermograms prove nothing. It's astounding that you call yourself a scientist and are willing to declare that this is unmitigated proof of CD. Your examples are so completely disconnected. No, YOU try doing some real research rather than this anomaly-based nonsense. Find documents, find witnesses, find paper trails, receipts, recordings of conversations, SOMETHING. You have zippo, and THAT's why no one's listening.
bman342 1 year ago
@bman342,
It's astounding that you can denounce the fact that Kevin Ryan was fired as a result of a letter he wrote to NIST. The Center For International 9/11 Studies recently forced NIST to release 3 Terabytes of Data, We have already gone through and found clear evidence for explosives and controlled demolition.
I also have another big surprise waiting to come out. We've done quite a bit of research into all those things you mentioned and found rich sources of information...
AlienScientist 1 year ago
Lol this is always a good one "why use planes?". I really hope this isn't the only thing keeping you from the truth. It's called an alabi, it's pretty hard to tell everyone that terrorists were able to plant military grade nano thermite(accelerant) without being caught
Iammyselfforlife 1 year ago
@Iammyselfforlife
exactly
Bi0hazardx 1 year ago
Email this to John Gross! agency: NIST email: john.gross (at) nist.gov
Bandticker 1 year ago
The towers collapsed because they were hit by planes traveling at around 500mph, filled with jet fuel, and weighing many many tons.
All of you conspiracy theorists are fucking retards.
ags432 1 year ago
@ags432
Thanks for showing everyone how ignorant you are on the subject. NO PLANE hit WTC 7, and it fell down at free-fall acceleration. The people who understand this video actually took physics unlike you. Anything falling at free-fall requires all its enegy, and has no left over energy to destroy or place force on anything. Otherwise that would be RESISTANCE, and couldn't happen in free-fall.
No plane hit WTC7, Your argument is a complete fail...
Bi0hazardx 1 year ago
Brah-FUCKIN-VO!
Modelmaterial7 1 year ago
Comment removed
Modelmaterial7 1 year ago
1) the temperature of the smoke billowing out of the window is not the same as the temperature of the fire.
2) The building was structurally compromised before the fires. Don't compare it to undamaged buring buildings. The intent, presumably, was for them to topple on impact.
3) When one corner collapses, the rest are put under a loading condition for which they weren't designed, ON TOP OF the burning and compromise.
4) The WTC had been bombed. If there were bombs, why bother w/plane
blurglide 1 year ago
@blurglide
Your logic makes me laugh. The WTC towers were built with a 20:1 redundancy. They could displace massive amounts of damage. Even the designers of the WTC said it could withstand multiple impacts of planes @ watch?v=sO1JxpVb2eU. NIST publicly said the plane damage wasn't that major, and that the collapse was rather due to fire. Furthermore another WTC Constructor Charlie Thornton commented in 1988 on the impossibility of a Jet Airliner bringing down a WTC Tower. @ watch?v=p8Z_X8xgrF8
Bi0hazardx 1 year ago
@blurglide
"The FBI's counterterrorism division concluded that the evidence presented by the [Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth] deserves FBI scrutiny. In a letter, Deputy Director Michael J. Heimbach assessed that the group's analysis is "backed by thorough research and analysis."
Please watch - Zero (A Nobel Prize Winner's 9/11 Documentary) @ watch?v=ofXKiXNDDYA
and AE911Truth's Blueprint for Truth @ watch?v=b74naeawdCs
Bi0hazardx 1 year ago
Excellent Excellent Excellent Excellent video... Did I say it was Excellent? Bravo thank God real scientist exist!
NaturalGroundation 1 year ago
FUCKIN RETARD! 220 IS AN AVERAGE DAY? WTF R U ON ABOUT?
hashpuppy101 1 year ago
have you ever uploaded a video that was censored or intervened by the goverment?
to0thpick3000 1 year ago
@Wilson888888888
Many US Counter-Terrorism and Intelligence Agent Veterans Challenge the Official Account of 9/11: "a Cover-up," "a Joke" "Terribly Flawed," "Laced with Contradictions,"
Gov SOURCES: PatriotsQuestion911(DOT)com (DOT) = .
Please watch - Zero (A Nobel Prize Winner's 9/11 Documentary) @ watch?v=ofXKiXNDDYA
DoYouCareAboutTruth 1 year ago
good information but the narrator should relax a bit. He stuttered a bit and sounded stessed
MrChameleon2010 1 year ago
What about John Lear's theories of holograms?
bwilkinson9 1 year ago
FBI Admits No Evidence on Bin Laden
On Jun 5-2006 author Ed Haas contacted the Federal Bureau of Investigation headquarters to ask why, while claiming that bin Laden is wanted for multiple events, but not 9/11!
Rex Tomb, Chief of Investigative Publicity for the FBI responded, The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Osama bin Ladens Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11. Tomb continued, Bin Laden has not been formally charged in connection to 9/11
DoYouCareAboutTruth 1 year ago
Members of the 911 Commission said it was a cover up. They were not allowed to look at a large amount of the evidence, and they had higher ups choosing what evidence they could see or not. Also over 41 US counter terrorism veterans agree that it is a cover up and inside job.
Senator, Max Cleland openly complains about how he was barred from seeing much of the evidence used to make the official story. He is outraged. Source of his CNN interview @ watch?v=LWE58Z5evgw
DoYouCareAboutTruth 1 year ago
But however I do believe alot of the conpiracy is bull shit sorry I respect what you believe I just don't believe it
wilkinson8707 1 year ago
@wilkinson8707
Many US Counter-Terrorism and Intelligence Agent Veterans Challenge the Official Account of 9/11: "a Cover-up," "a Joke" "Terribly Flawed," "Laced with Contradictions,"
Gov SOURCES: PatriotsQuestion911(DOT)com (DOT) = .
Please watch - Zero (A Nobel Prize Winner's 9/11 Documentary) @ watch?v=ofXKiXNDDYA
If you care about America, and the world, you really need to watch the movie Zero. It has many interviews with US government personnel exposing the events.
DoYouCareAboutTruth 1 year ago
I don't know what destroyed wtc 7 Im not sure if it was fire but It seems impossible it was a controlled demolition because someone would of noticed something and it impossible for them all to be covering it up and wtc7 didn't fall at freefall speed it came down at half that rate of a normal controlled demolition some the honest answer is I don't know
wilkinson8707 1 year ago
Fair enough I just don't see the logic that's all In the goverment blowing them up just to attack Iraq and aghasistan or whatever but all well cause will never know
wilkinson8707 1 year ago
@wilkinson8707 watch this, /watch?v=f7ixuf236Dk
the first half is about how 9 hijackers are still alive, but to answer your question/ void your statement, (no disrespect), at 2:10 listen to what the video creator says, "What justification do we have for bombing Afghanistan" and then continue to watch the video and listen to Carl Schwarz. He explains why the government wants to takeover the middle east. Thank you
HereIsYourProofSir 1 year ago
FBI Admits No Evidence on Bin Laden
On Jun 5-2006 author Ed Haas contacted the Federal Bureau of Investigation headquarters to ask why, while claiming that bin Laden is wanted for multiple events, but not 9/11!
Rex Tomb, Chief of Investigative Publicity for the FBI responded, The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Osama bin Ladens Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11. Tomb continued, Bin Laden has not been formally charged in connection to 9/11
DoYouCareAboutTruth 1 year ago 7
SOURCE: watch?v=LWE58Z5evgw
Members of the 911 Commission said it was a cover up. They were not allowed to look at a large amount of the evidence, and they had higher ups choosing what evidence they could see or not. Also over 41 US counter terrorism veterans agree that it is a cover up and inside job.
Senator, Max Cleland openly complains about how he was barred from seeing much of the evidence used to make the official story. He is outraged. Source of his CNN interview is posted above.
DoYouCareAboutTruth 1 year ago
* Undeniable - 100% Proof of Molten Steel and Explosives. @ watch?v=8YaFGSPErKU
Neither fires nor a collapse could create molten steel. Even NIST admitted that the temperatures needed to create molten metal and merge steel together - could not have happened due to the official explanation of the collapse
Debunkers skip what they cannot explain:
A straight forward video of NIST discussing this, and the irrefutable evidence of Molten Steel. I hope you actually check into both sides of the debate
DoYouCareAboutTruth 1 year ago
A Boeing 737 could of easily destroyed the twin towers witch they did there's no conspiracy by the way is there a conspiracy out on how michael Jackson died if so Id like to hear it
wilkinson8707 1 year ago
@wilkinson8707
Thanks for showing us how ignorant you are on the subject. WTC 7 was not hit by a plane and feel down as well at free-fall acceleration as admitted by the National Institution of Standards and technology.
Explain how a collapse that required compression could take place in a state of freefall, on a building that wasn't hit by a plane - it was taller than the tallest building in most of the US states.
DoYouCareAboutTruth 1 year ago
@wilkinson8707 please explain...
I mean the official explanation for the collapse of WTC is so preposterous, I'm surprised they didn't just implode the entire pentagon and blame it on the "plane crash". Even of plane could demolish such huge structures, please explain what destroyed Tower 7. thanks!
eduTouY 1 year ago
love this video good work bro
TeamAlphaTwo7 1 year ago
nice work!!!!!! you whant more proof??????????
123456alcatraz 1 year ago
* 41 U.S. Counter-Terrorism and Intelligence Agency Veterans Challenge the Official Account of 9/11: "a Cover-up," "Terribly Flawed," "Laced with Contradictions," "a Joke"
SOURCE: PatriotsQuestion911.(com) - Remove ()s to view link
Zero (by a Nobel Prize Winner) @ watch?v=ofXKiXNDDYA
-----------------------------------
* 84% of New Yorker's Reject the Official 9/11 Story - Saying there is a Cover Up.
In 2006 CBS and NY Times ran an extensive poll with these results@
Tinyurl(dot)com/yek5c5s
DoYouCareAboutTruth 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
* 41 U.S. Counter-Terrorism and Intelligence Agency Veterans Challenge the Official Account of 9/11: "a Cover-up," "Terribly Flawed," "Laced with Contradictions," "a Joke"
SOURCE: PatriotsQuestion911.(com) - Remove ()s to view link
Zero (by a Nobel Prize Winner) @ watch?v=ofXKiXNDDYA
-----------------------------------
* 84% of New Yorker's Reject the Official 9/11 Story - Saying there is a cover up.
In 2006 CBS and NY Times ran an extensive poll with these results@
Tinyurl(dot)com/yek5c5s
DoYouCareAboutTruth 1 year ago
SOURCE: watch?v=LWE58Z5evgw
Many of the members of the 911 Commission said it was a cover up. They were not allowed to look at a large amount of the evidence, and they had higher ups choosing what evidence they could see or not. Also over 41 US counter terrorism veterans agree that it is a cover up and inside job
Senator, Max Cleland openly complains about how he was barred from seeing much of the evidence used to make the official story. He is outraged. Source of his interview is posted above
DoYouCareAboutTruth 1 year ago
If you really care about your country please check these out
Undeniable - 100% Proof of Molten Steel . Temperatures neither fires nor the collapse could produce. @ watch?v=8YaFGSPErKU
911 Connect the Dots is a great 18 min video @ watch?v=HfmliaqIRBE
Nobel Prize Winner's Video on 9/11 @ watch?v=ofXKiXNDDYA
Verifiable Science and Physics - 911 @ watch?v=K2Mor7udxJI&
Thermite Scientifically Confirmed in 911 @ watch?v=Vy1oPmuZZ98&
Click on the Peer Reviewed Primary Article in the description!
DoYouCareAboutTruth 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
LOL, He shows a picture of the Building raging on fire, and he has the balls to say it wasnt hotter than 220 F. Thats like a really hot day in California. I mean just for me, looking at that building raging on fire, I know just by being a human and adult that the temperature is also hotter that 220F. What an idiot this kid is. And why are people listening to him, hes a retard. He doesnt think the buildings could collapse without a "Miracle" because of his Probabililities. What a loser.
JPPolachek 1 year ago
Edna Cintron was identified as the woman standing in the impact hole waving for help.
How could a woman be standing there if there temperatures were anywhere NEAR hot enough to weaken steel?
If you think that 220F is a really hot day in California, I think you need to check the Farmer's Almanac and see when the hottest day actually was and what temperatures it got to... You clearly have absolutely no idea what you are talking about...
AlienScientist 1 year ago 17
@AlienScientist Your right AllenScientist. I forgot that you have proven that fshe was a fake person...and that the fireball and fires around her were......what,,,,hotter ,colder thannn...WHAT>...what are you saying...that she is not really standing their....or that it was COLD inside the building......Maybee it wasnt very hot were she was standing,,,but it was hot were the fires were burning....The Nist report shows that the TEMPS at that spot were not to hot to survive....
JPPolachek 1 year ago
@AlienScientist Well youve done it....through that brilliant piece of reasoning youve proven SUPER, NANO, ULTRA Thermite was really used........Yep, they planted bombs at that exact floor......Then smashed a plane into the same spot.....somehow the explosives survived the plane impact and fires for an hour.....then at the designated hour....BUsh lit the fuse......or pushed the button.......soooo retarded....and you call yourselfan AlienSCientist. what about that one. huh
JPPolachek 1 year ago
for one thing that bldg in Madrid is constructed different, and I think the most contributing factor to the collapse of the wtc's, was the plane impact themselves, it had to be a tremendous amount of force expelled into the bldgs over several floors, when you have a 250k lb plane full of 10k gallons of fuel going 500 mph
shanquilla562 1 year ago
@AlienScientist
same way people survive building fires. just because theres a fire in one part of the building doesn't mean its on fire in another part. But eventually, it will spread.
happens all the time in chicago. Sometimes the firedept is too late, and those people die from smoke, then their bodies get burned
taledarkside 1 year ago
JPPolachek you are so stupid...one of the dumbest peoeple in the world
TeamAlphaTwo7 1 year ago
@TeamAlphaTwo7
polachek is a lot smarter than the guy who made the video. First he claims 200 degrees and later changes it to 400. And buildings don't collapse from fire. ROFL.
taledarkside 1 year ago
@taledarkside Nice straw man argument. Now try explaining where enough energy to pulverize a 110 story building came from. Ohhh....of couse!!! It was an office fire! I should have known better. lol
eduTouY 1 year ago
@eduTouY
the WTC doesn't look like it was pulverized too me. maybe you should look up the word "pulverized"
Look like the WTC was hit by a commercial jet. Didn't know it had an office fire.
taledarkside 1 year ago
@taledarkside
Definition of Pulverize:
verb (used with object)
1. to reduce to dust or powder, as by pounding or grinding.
2. to demolish or crush completely.
I think it's an appropriate verb to describe what happened to the WTC.
eduTouY 1 year ago
@eduTouY
WTC didn't turn to dust. concrete and drywall turned to dust.
so no, that is a bad verb to use for such an occurence
taledarkside 1 year ago
@taledarkside Thank you for the correction. I forgot to mention the steel beams which were ejected hundreds of feet by a "gravitational collapse." It's funny how gravity was 1000 times more powerful beneath the WTC than in any other place on earth. =D
eduTouY 1 year ago
@eduTouY
Beams were ejected when the plane hit the building.
2nd. Gravity is a lot stronger then what you claim. What do you think is keeping the earth revolving around the sun? Gravity.
while the beams were "ejected" that means they were never "pulverized"
taledarkside 1 year ago
@taledarkside ok. you win.
eduTouY 1 year ago