First of all, no it isn't. Send me a link. Second, if you knew anything about video, you would know that video of the same object will not match pixel perfect from frame to frame.
So, if that 'nose' (not a nose, engine and landing gear that exited the building and were found) is a layer composite error, then why is it visible in every single shot of the impact/exit? Why can you see it continue and fall to the ground? And where, oh where is the pixel study that Simon 'Head Retard' Shack references? It doesn't exist. Furthermore, even video of the same object will not be pixel perfect from frame to frame. Welcome to digital video, retard twoofers! Now get jobs!
how do you know that was the nose coming out the other side???? i think you have way too much time on your hands ummm try dating or go see a movie LMAO
THE NO PLANE THEORY is a diversion from the real evidence. It has NO credibility in the scientific truth community. Its a COINTEL operation to try to ridicule the truth movement. Do NOT pay any attention to it.
That's because you're a twoofer who can't properly understand the evidence. If this was the nose, due to an 'editing mistake' with the layers, then why would the same protrusion be visible in every angle? In September Clues they feathered edges to obscure detail, then used the two frames that looked the most similar, and they still don't match. They lied when they said the 'peer reviewed pixel study was available. Where is it?
@nobraintheory "then why would the same protrusion be visible in every angle?"
.
Obviously they altered the amateur footage to match, and added a shadow, the shadow is not in the original FOX footage?
If it's not the nose-cone then what is it?
Smoke is what it appears to be, yet it keeps roughly the same shape and size of a 737 fuselage? also this smoke has ZERO diffusion for many "frames" contrary to every explosion ever! The "FOX" LIVE footage from 9/11 has a plethora of fuckups!
This "cloud of crap" which just happens to EXACTLY match the size of the fuselage, is ejected from the building and this cloud displays NO "diffusion" a physical impossibility! This physically impossible "cloud of crap" is the coverup for the infamous nose-out!!!
.
You know jack shit about video
I have made 11 videos check out my channel!
.
A PIXEL STUDY IS POINTLESS, THE DIMENSIONS OF YOUR CLOUD OF CRAP IS WAY TOO CLOSE TO THE EXACT SIZE OF A 737
Well, you are the only person to claim that, even ALL the news anchors saw the plane go "right through" everybody that sees and comments on this video, sees the same thing.
Matching pixels from any "continuous piece of footage" will have pixel variation, are you that stupid?
You do NOT teach at any university, baby jesus HATES liars!
@ProtectAus "The shape of the ejected material is an EXACT match for the fuselage!"
1. No, it's not. Take a screenshot of the two and post them side by side.
2. Even if it was, that doesn't mean shit. Things being the same shape doesn't mean they are the same thing.
"non diffusion of the smoke."
What are you on about? The object exits the building and is clearly seen falling to the street, flaming and followed by a trail of smoke. The engine was found on the street.
@nobraintheory "Take a screenshot of the two and post them side by side."
.
@0:42 watch?v=IyUxeaR7FuM i supply a picture with a "plane" and the nose-cone coverup, also i give an example of diffusion of smoke, the fire and smoke on the other faces do NOT show this strange anomaly and i show the exit hole which is relatively unscathed, and those steel beams would have increased the diffusion.
@1:15 i show CGI chopper shots and @2:37 i show photoshopped vicsims
I KNOW for a fact they are not real and my videos at ProtectAus will lead you to salvation!
.
They're different shapes. Can't you see?
That's a funny tact, I just showed 9 people the ejected smoke made to look like the "FOX" noseout and they ALL agree that the shapes are too close to be called a coincidence!
.
Your arguments have become increasingly monotonous, good luck spewing your vile Truther bullshit!
@nob "When you say something is 'close' it implies it's not the same."
.
from the The Free Online Dictionary
"Faithful to the original: a close copy"
As i said the NoseOut is EXACTLY the same and the Smoke coverup is close enough.
The chances that this smoke is very close in size to a 737 noseout is astronomical and the fact that this smoke is unique in it's ability to be non-diffusible seals it's origin as a CGI coverup!
Photoshopping in the Online Memorials implies NO victims. Simple!
@ProtectAus - "Photoshopping in the Online Memorials implies NO victims. Simple!"
The problem with twoofers is you have no logic. To you, two things that are similar shapes have to be the same thing. Everyone knows that's not true. Now you're saying if a picture of someone is photoshopped the entire group of people never existed. That's stupid. Your whole argument is built on logical fallacies.
@nobraintheory "What does your fast food job in Australia pay?"
.
I work at KFC and I am on a minimum wage of $18.79 an hour, why do you ask?
I know it's not as much as someone who teaches video production and motion graphics at a university, but it's a living ;-))
BTW for a University Professor you display the literacy and comprehension skills of a 12 year old, do you believe that by communicating in such a primitive fashion you can better connect with the common man?
I knew it. The twoof movement: fast food workers talking about physics and technology. Wow.
"do you believe that by communicating in such a primitive fashion you can better connect with the common man?"
No, in fact my goal is not to connect with you at all. You disgust me. I truly believe that people who believe what you do are the least intelligent of all who walk the earth.
You shouldn't have wasted your time, everyone already knew that.
"9/11 was a TV Movie!"
If you've solved the biggest crime in history why is hanging out on youtube the best thing you can do? Surely if you have proof you could take it to court or something. Make some money, move out of your mom's house.
Then why did you ask? You asked me a question and now you're mad that I answered. You're such a whiny bitch. You think you're some freedom fighter, combating the NWO on youtube, but you're just another dipshit conspiritard that's completely ignored in the real world. You run around here spamming your videos begging people to watch because it's the closest thing you have to personal interaction. What a waste.
Are the people you are trying to convert with your thousands of brainless comments not real?
On Youtube i have a potential worldwide audience of millions and besides TV, what can come even remotely close?
TV produced the above CGI which has many mistakes, the nose-out, the missing shadow, the missing plane in the long shot, the incredible timing of the final zoom, and etc etc
Trust ProtectAus and my 11 videos as i SOLVE Conspiracies
@ProtectAus "Are the people you are trying to convert with your thousands of brainless comments not real?"
Not trying to convert anyone, if I was then I would have multiple propaganda videos on my page like yourself. Unlike you, I'm not pushing any ideas or agenda.
"TV produced the above CGI which has many mistakes"
Again, you know nothing about the production of CGI, you might as well be talking about rocket science.
@ProtectAus So is there or is there not a peer reviewed pixel study as claimed by Simon Shack? Is he lying?
"Obviously they altered the amateur footage to match"
"They" who? The videos were taken by amateurs and turned in to the news or posted to the web. "They" can't magically intercept every video before it's leaked. There is no video that shows anything different. All the evidence says that your dipshit theories are wrong, and it still doesn't matter to you.
This is the second worse theory to come out of the Truth Movement. The worse is the No Victims theory, which spits on the lives of everyone who died that day.
The images you are featuring are not honest imagines. They were changed by smoothing the edges, then the two that seemed the closest in shape were used. Just the act of smoothing the edges is an act of deception.
@stbays There is stupid people everywhere I guess,and a lot of victims family members are in the truthers. Do you know what "theory" meen's ? It' a model that confronted to the facts, either comes out as wrong, or as tru,Like the laws of physics did. And I dont know any that can explain how a smoking tower can blow into dust 1 hour or so after a plane impact;it makes no sense. Do you ?
As for who did it, I dont care; I would be happy for Al Quaeda, but Al Quaeda is a CIA op anyway(documented)
A good theory has basis that are grounded in fact. Fact is the planes were seen. Fact is no holographic technology existed that day that would've been believeable by anyone with two working eyes (back then, even the best holographics gave off a glow).
Finally, while I'm willing to consider different types of planes, there's enough people saying they saw something plane shaped to rule out the "No Planes Theory".
BTW, almost forgot to mention, yes, the American government supplied arms to Al Quaeda. Problem is they did this to interrupt the USSR. That's where the ties ended. Sort of the same way your dad might've helped you buy your first car, yet you rebel against him later in life (maybe you did, maybe you didn't. just an analogy). Your father wouldn't be held accountable for the trouble you start later in your life right?
There is a video of the nose going through the building taken closer up and from the other side....it aint a graphic...thats bullshit....it aint a planes nose-cone neither!
You are an idiot. I was there. There were no missles you fucking hack. Besides, they have already prooved that this video is a low bandwidth, non-interlaced video disigned to filter out pixels. Lastly, its true, Bush was too god damn stupid to make this happen.
I see what you're getting at and well spotted BUT what about all the other thousands of captured video with camcorders from all over the city and from different angles? Same plane.
I'm sticking to the theory that they may have been rC Drones.
Sooooooooooo..... lets say that this video is a fake.... now what......Do ypu really want to storm the white house??? Or... or.... ooh i know...appeal to congress? One more example of a fraud of an overwhelmingly powerful govt. DEMOCRACY IS DEAD...
Kinetic energy, other videos from different angles do not show the nose coming out however what they do show is debris, fuel, flames, office equipment.
Great , but why wouldn't they use remote planes, This is clouding the issue and bordering on disinformation. Definitely planes ,Definitely inside job !
you have to be kidding. i thought this was a comedy when i clicked on the title. people are actually beleiving this? and then they call it a truth movement HAHAHAHAHA!!!! good one!
This is what you saw live on 9/11, what millions of people recorded.. so go ahead and please do explain by your logic.. wtf just happened there? Again I find it funny you commented on all my 911 videos except 1.. lol the most hard to deny :)
If I may, I'd suggest checking this before you put any more stock in the "Nose in/Nose out" "evidence". There's video fakery, but not from who you're assuming.
watch?v=k4Jahg9fxM4
And if you're wondering, that guy does think 9/11 was an inside job, just not video fakery as he very nicely proves.
You see this in every video of the second plane attack. It was a small piece of the nose that forced it's way thru the building at high velocity and decintegrated just a few seconds after exiting the building. But I suppose corp7usa7is7bk will rat on me for being a "fraud spy."
It would have dicintergrated Instantly on impact remember planes r no Stronger than a Coke can they need 2 b light 2 fly no way could it have gone threw
No stonger than a coke can?? Planes have to withstand thousands of pounds of pressure from inside the cabin so as not to tear themselves apart. Just because a plane is "light" doesn't mean it's not strong.
"The pixel study is available for peer review"
First of all, no it isn't. Send me a link. Second, if you knew anything about video, you would know that video of the same object will not match pixel perfect from frame to frame.
Double twoof-tard fail.
nobraintheory 2 months ago
So, if that 'nose' (not a nose, engine and landing gear that exited the building and were found) is a layer composite error, then why is it visible in every single shot of the impact/exit? Why can you see it continue and fall to the ground? And where, oh where is the pixel study that Simon 'Head Retard' Shack references? It doesn't exist. Furthermore, even video of the same object will not be pixel perfect from frame to frame. Welcome to digital video, retard twoofers! Now get jobs!
nobraintheory 2 months ago
oh btw i was there that day and it did happen i lost good friends so explain how that was fake you retarded fool
tenroc4202k12 4 months ago
@tenroc4202k12 the video is fake, not 911
quez76 1 week ago in playlist 911 ~ No Planes? Huh!!!!
@quez76 im sure they are some fake ones out there lol but maybe you should get more
tenroc4202k12 4 days ago
how do you know that was the nose coming out the other side???? i think you have way too much time on your hands ummm try dating or go see a movie LMAO
tenroc4202k12 4 months ago
THE NO PLANE THEORY is a diversion from the real evidence. It has NO credibility in the scientific truth community. Its a COINTEL operation to try to ridicule the truth movement. Do NOT pay any attention to it.
The911watch 4 months ago
If it Was planed then why have all those people die is there anyone who would plan that an not think about all the people they were about to kill
dragonb1ad3 10 months ago
I call that, proof beyond reasonable doubt.
A lot of people attack the details or the person.
But no proof to the contrary,
Case closed !
MrPierrePhilippe 1 year ago
@MrPierrePhilippe "I call that, proof beyond reasonable doubt."
That's because you're a twoofer who can't properly understand the evidence. If this was the nose, due to an 'editing mistake' with the layers, then why would the same protrusion be visible in every angle? In September Clues they feathered edges to obscure detail, then used the two frames that looked the most similar, and they still don't match. They lied when they said the 'peer reviewed pixel study was available. Where is it?
nobraintheory 1 year ago
@nobraintheory "then why would the same protrusion be visible in every angle?"
.
Obviously they altered the amateur footage to match, and added a shadow, the shadow is not in the original FOX footage?
If it's not the nose-cone then what is it?
Smoke is what it appears to be, yet it keeps roughly the same shape and size of a 737 fuselage? also this smoke has ZERO diffusion for many "frames" contrary to every explosion ever! The "FOX" LIVE footage from 9/11 has a plethora of fuckups!
ProtectAus 1 year ago
@ProtectAus "If it's not the nose-cone then what is it?"
It's debris, likely the engine, pushing out a cloud of crap. If you actually watch the video you can even see it fall flaming to the ground.
"The "FOX" LIVE footage from 9/11 has a plethora of fuckups!"
You know jack shit about video, cgi, production, etc. You're speaking from a perspective of ignorance and misunderstanding.
Again, WHERE IS THE PEER REVIEWED PIXEL STUDY THAT SIMON SHACK REFERS TO? The pixels don't match.
nobraintheory 1 year ago
@nobraintheory "pushing out a cloud of crap"
This "cloud of crap" which just happens to EXACTLY match the size of the fuselage, is ejected from the building and this cloud displays NO "diffusion" a physical impossibility! This physically impossible "cloud of crap" is the coverup for the infamous nose-out!!!
.
You know jack shit about video
I have made 11 videos check out my channel!
.
A PIXEL STUDY IS POINTLESS, THE DIMENSIONS OF YOUR CLOUD OF CRAP IS WAY TOO CLOSE TO THE EXACT SIZE OF A 737
ProtectAus 1 year ago
@ProtectAus "This "cloud of crap" which just happens to EXACTLY match the size of the fuselage,"
Nope, the pixels don't match. Simon says they do, and he's lying. The debris is visible in every shot, ruling out an 'editing mistake.'
"You know jack shit about video"
I teach video production and motion graphics at a university. What do you do?
"I have made 11 videos check out my channel!"
No.
"A PIXEL STUDY IS POINTLESS"
Then why does your hero Simon claim it proves his stupid theory?
nobraintheory 1 year ago
@nobraintheory "Nope, the pixels don't match"
.
Well, you are the only person to claim that, even ALL the news anchors saw the plane go "right through" everybody that sees and comments on this video, sees the same thing.
Matching pixels from any "continuous piece of footage" will have pixel variation, are you that stupid?
You do NOT teach at any university, baby jesus HATES liars!
ProtectAus 1 year ago
@ProtectAus "Well, you are the only person to claim that"
Nope, I'm not. According to your message you don't think they match either.
"even ALL the news anchors saw the plane go "right through"
Pieces of the plane did, you're kinda slow, huh?
"Matching pixels from any "continuous piece of footage" will have pixel variation"
No shit, I'm not the one claiming they match, Simon Shack is. The shapes are even different.
"You do NOT teach at any university"
Wrong again, dipshit.
nobraintheory 1 year ago
@nobraintheory "Wrong again, dipshit"
.
Thanks for the insult, a clear indication that you have nothing and have resorted to name calling!
The shape of the ejected material is an EXACT match for the fuselage!
Show me one example of ANY violent explosion that has non diffusion of the smoke.
9/11 was a huge Television show with bad actors and substandard SFX!
ProtectAus 1 year ago
@ProtectAus "The shape of the ejected material is an EXACT match for the fuselage!"
1. No, it's not. Take a screenshot of the two and post them side by side.
2. Even if it was, that doesn't mean shit. Things being the same shape doesn't mean they are the same thing.
"non diffusion of the smoke."
What are you on about? The object exits the building and is clearly seen falling to the street, flaming and followed by a trail of smoke. The engine was found on the street.
nobraintheory 1 year ago
@nobraintheory "Take a screenshot of the two and post them side by side."
.
@0:42 watch?v=IyUxeaR7FuM i supply a picture with a "plane" and the nose-cone coverup, also i give an example of diffusion of smoke, the fire and smoke on the other faces do NOT show this strange anomaly and i show the exit hole which is relatively unscathed, and those steel beams would have increased the diffusion.
@1:15 i show CGI chopper shots and @2:37 i show photoshopped vicsims
Click on ProtectAus for the TRUTH!
ProtectAus 1 year ago
@ProtectAus "i supply a picture with a "plane" and the nose-cone coverup"
They're different shapes. Can't you see?
" i show photoshopped vicsims
So you think the victims families are lying? You don't believe these people are real. Wow, what a disrespectful piece of shit.
"Click on ProtectAus for the TRUTH! "
And a spammer? Pathetic. If your videos weren't retarded you wouldn't have to beg people to watch them. Later dipshit.
nobraintheory 1 year ago
@nob "You don't believe these people are real."
I KNOW for a fact they are not real and my videos at ProtectAus will lead you to salvation!
.
They're different shapes. Can't you see?
That's a funny tact, I just showed 9 people the ejected smoke made to look like the "FOX" noseout and they ALL agree that the shapes are too close to be called a coincidence!
.
Your arguments have become increasingly monotonous, good luck spewing your vile Truther bullshit!
Click on ProtectAus if you seek answers
ProtectAus 1 year ago
@ProtectAus
"the shapes are too close"
When you say something is 'close' it implies it's not the same. There you go.
"I KNOW for a fact they are not real"
Fuck off. You're the worst kind of twoofer, the victim denier. Go talk to someone stupid enough to believe your bullshit.
nobraintheory 1 year ago
@nob "When you say something is 'close' it implies it's not the same."
.
from the The Free Online Dictionary
"Faithful to the original: a close copy"
As i said the NoseOut is EXACTLY the same and the Smoke coverup is close enough.
The chances that this smoke is very close in size to a 737 noseout is astronomical and the fact that this smoke is unique in it's ability to be non-diffusible seals it's origin as a CGI coverup!
Photoshopping in the Online Memorials implies NO victims. Simple!
ProtectAus 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ProtectAus - "Photoshopping in the Online Memorials implies NO victims. Simple!"
The problem with twoofers is you have no logic. To you, two things that are similar shapes have to be the same thing. Everyone knows that's not true. Now you're saying if a picture of someone is photoshopped the entire group of people never existed. That's stupid. Your whole argument is built on logical fallacies.
nobraintheory 1 year ago
@ProtectAus "Photoshopping in the Online Memorials implies NO victims."
What does your fast food job in Australia pay?
nobraintheory 1 year ago
@nobraintheory "What does your fast food job in Australia pay?"
.
I work at KFC and I am on a minimum wage of $18.79 an hour, why do you ask?
I know it's not as much as someone who teaches video production and motion graphics at a university, but it's a living ;-))
BTW for a University Professor you display the literacy and comprehension skills of a 12 year old, do you believe that by communicating in such a primitive fashion you can better connect with the common man?
If so, ingenious!!! Bravo
ProtectAus 1 year ago
@ProtectAus "I work at KFC"
I knew it. The twoof movement: fast food workers talking about physics and technology. Wow.
"do you believe that by communicating in such a primitive fashion you can better connect with the common man?"
No, in fact my goal is not to connect with you at all. You disgust me. I truly believe that people who believe what you do are the least intelligent of all who walk the earth.
nobraintheory 1 year ago
@nobraintheory "fast food workers talking...Wow"
My comment was dripping with obvious sarcasm, unlike your pathetic attempt to justify your comments with the
"I'm a University Professor routine"
.
"I truly believe"
Nobody gives a FUCK what you think!
BTW as you profess to have an expert knowledge in video production, why have you got NO video uploads demonstrating your Nobrain theories?
I have ELEVEN video uploads, proving Man walked on the Moon and Oswald was Guilty and 9/11 was a TV Movie!
ProtectAus 1 year ago
@ProtectAus "why have you got NO video uploads"
If you're good at something never do it for free.
"I have ELEVEN"
Wow! Eleven!
"proving Man walked on the Moon"
You shouldn't have wasted your time, everyone already knew that.
"9/11 was a TV Movie!"
If you've solved the biggest crime in history why is hanging out on youtube the best thing you can do? Surely if you have proof you could take it to court or something. Make some money, move out of your mom's house.
nobraintheory 1 year ago
@ProtectAus "Nobody gives a FUCK what you think!"
Then why did you ask? You asked me a question and now you're mad that I answered. You're such a whiny bitch. You think you're some freedom fighter, combating the NWO on youtube, but you're just another dipshit conspiritard that's completely ignored in the real world. You run around here spamming your videos begging people to watch because it's the closest thing you have to personal interaction. What a waste.
nobraintheory 1 year ago
@nobraintheory "completely ignored in the real world"
.
Are the people you are trying to convert with your thousands of brainless comments not real?
On Youtube i have a potential worldwide audience of millions and besides TV, what can come even remotely close?
TV produced the above CGI which has many mistakes, the nose-out, the missing shadow, the missing plane in the long shot, the incredible timing of the final zoom, and etc etc
Trust ProtectAus and my 11 videos as i SOLVE Conspiracies
.
.
ProtectAus 1 year ago
@ProtectAus "Are the people you are trying to convert with your thousands of brainless comments not real?"
Not trying to convert anyone, if I was then I would have multiple propaganda videos on my page like yourself. Unlike you, I'm not pushing any ideas or agenda.
"TV produced the above CGI which has many mistakes"
Again, you know nothing about the production of CGI, you might as well be talking about rocket science.
"Trust ProtectAus"
The trustworthy don't have to beg for trust.
nobraintheory 1 year ago
@nobraintheory "Not trying to convert anyone"
.
Then WHY have you left thousands of comments condemning any conspiracy to do with 9/11???
And you picked "nobraintheory" as your nickname and agenda, have you always been STUPID?? LOL
As my ELEVEN videos, some of which have been acknowledged by NASA, use extensive CGI, i seem to know shit loads more than you!!!
Therefore until you can show any proof that you know anything about SFX we will accept your status as a "Fucking Loser"
This is TOO easy
ProtectAus 1 year ago
@ProtectAus "Then WHY have you left thousands of comments condemning any conspiracy to do with 9/11???"
Because when people lie it should be pointed out.
nobraintheory 1 year ago
@ProtectAus So is there or is there not a peer reviewed pixel study as claimed by Simon Shack? Is he lying?
"Obviously they altered the amateur footage to match"
"They" who? The videos were taken by amateurs and turned in to the news or posted to the web. "They" can't magically intercept every video before it's leaked. There is no video that shows anything different. All the evidence says that your dipshit theories are wrong, and it still doesn't matter to you.
nobraintheory 1 year ago
This is the second worse theory to come out of the Truth Movement. The worse is the No Victims theory, which spits on the lives of everyone who died that day.
The images you are featuring are not honest imagines. They were changed by smoothing the edges, then the two that seemed the closest in shape were used. Just the act of smoothing the edges is an act of deception.
stbays 1 year ago
@stbays There is stupid people everywhere I guess,and a lot of victims family members are in the truthers. Do you know what "theory" meen's ? It' a model that confronted to the facts, either comes out as wrong, or as tru,Like the laws of physics did. And I dont know any that can explain how a smoking tower can blow into dust 1 hour or so after a plane impact;it makes no sense. Do you ?
As for who did it, I dont care; I would be happy for Al Quaeda, but Al Quaeda is a CIA op anyway(documented)
MrPierrePhilippe 1 year ago
@MrPierrePhilippe
A good theory has basis that are grounded in fact. Fact is the planes were seen. Fact is no holographic technology existed that day that would've been believeable by anyone with two working eyes (back then, even the best holographics gave off a glow).
Finally, while I'm willing to consider different types of planes, there's enough people saying they saw something plane shaped to rule out the "No Planes Theory".
stbays 1 year ago
@MrPierrePhilippe
BTW, almost forgot to mention, yes, the American government supplied arms to Al Quaeda. Problem is they did this to interrupt the USSR. That's where the ties ended. Sort of the same way your dad might've helped you buy your first car, yet you rebel against him later in life (maybe you did, maybe you didn't. just an analogy). Your father wouldn't be held accountable for the trouble you start later in your life right?
stbays 1 year ago
that is the video that they showed 'live' that day.
Holy Fuck
that means that the footage is all over the place, Everyone who has that footage slow motion, confirm and share
rawmo 1 year ago
There is a video of the nose going through the building taken closer up and from the other side....it aint a graphic...thats bullshit....it aint a planes nose-cone neither!
batterseaspark 1 year ago
You are an idiot. I was there. There were no missles you fucking hack. Besides, they have already prooved that this video is a low bandwidth, non-interlaced video disigned to filter out pixels. Lastly, its true, Bush was too god damn stupid to make this happen.
saganhill 1 year ago
Cameraman: Was that a plane ? 0:25
ariausdeutschland 1 year ago
Of course the uploader is from Canada the land of morons. I hate twits like you that disrespect the victims.
minwild30 1 year ago
@minwild30, I'm canadian and I don't appreciate you calling me or my fellow canadians morons!!!
DanteLacey21 1 year ago
@DanteLacey21 I'm Canadian too. But I, enjoy when they call me "moron" or anything ; That's the proof they have no arguments, no way out.
They are cornered, with no means to defend what they (desperately want to) believe in.
We've seen this from outside from the beginning; sheeps being manipulated.
So we KNOW. The reason they're so angry at us, it's because somewhere they know it too.
And they also know: it took them 10 years more.
Painfull situation,painfull questions, painfull answers...
MrPierrePhilippe 1 year ago
But bro people in new york filmed it on cam quarters airplane definitely hit it your just watching news videos!
phillybirds69 1 year ago
Guys, 9/11 is over. It doesn't matter anymore.
Windows446 2 years ago
I see what you're getting at and well spotted BUT what about all the other thousands of captured video with camcorders from all over the city and from different angles? Same plane.
I'm sticking to the theory that they may have been rC Drones.
Cheers!
ChemtrailsEire 2 years ago
Sooooooooooo..... lets say that this video is a fake.... now what......Do ypu really want to storm the white house??? Or... or.... ooh i know...appeal to congress? One more example of a fraud of an overwhelmingly powerful govt. DEMOCRACY IS DEAD...
M1NDC0N7R0L 2 years ago
The resolution of the camera will NOT pick up something a lot smaller than the towers from so far away.
Take a photography course so you have a better understanding of resolution.
Bluetooht 2 years ago
Nose in, nose out.
Kinetic energy, other videos from different angles do not show the nose coming out however what they do show is debris, fuel, flames, office equipment.
Bluetooht 2 years ago
Great , but why wouldn't they use remote planes, This is clouding the issue and bordering on disinformation. Definitely planes ,Definitely inside job !
marxman00 2 years ago
you have to be kidding. i thought this was a comedy when i clicked on the title. people are actually beleiving this? and then they call it a truth movement HAHAHAHAHA!!!! good one!
checkfoldcallraise 2 years ago
This is what you saw live on 9/11, what millions of people recorded.. so go ahead and please do explain by your logic.. wtf just happened there? Again I find it funny you commented on all my 911 videos except 1.. lol the most hard to deny :)
Gregk82 2 years ago
wich one?
checkfoldcallraise 2 years ago
@Gregk82 please explain the the videos that show a plane hitting the tower
M11ty 1 year ago
@Gregk82
If I may, I'd suggest checking this before you put any more stock in the "Nose in/Nose out" "evidence". There's video fakery, but not from who you're assuming.
watch?v=k4Jahg9fxM4
And if you're wondering, that guy does think 9/11 was an inside job, just not video fakery as he very nicely proves.
stbays 1 year ago
@checkfoldcallraise ahh you think there were no planes? or planes?
benry200 7 months ago
u need to c a doctor, something really wrong with u
cabbageowen 3 years ago
how can the planes be faked ?
RawVegan0 3 years ago
hmm watch my other video named "lets create a fake plane"
rofl, if that dosent anwser your question i dunno what will
Gregk82 3 years ago
You see this in every video of the second plane attack. It was a small piece of the nose that forced it's way thru the building at high velocity and decintegrated just a few seconds after exiting the building. But I suppose corp7usa7is7bk will rat on me for being a "fraud spy."
Zmainy 3 years ago
It would have dicintergrated Instantly on impact remember planes r no Stronger than a Coke can they need 2 b light 2 fly no way could it have gone threw
melovesweed 2 years ago
No stonger than a coke can?? Planes have to withstand thousands of pounds of pressure from inside the cabin so as not to tear themselves apart. Just because a plane is "light" doesn't mean it's not strong.
Zmainy 2 years ago
did u ever see a bird hit a plane? .. lol
Gregk82 2 years ago
thanks for helpin spread the word brotha. this crap needs to be stopped here and now
Phearlis 3 years ago