Added: 4 years ago
From: kinaydjin
Views: 3,338
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (20)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Comment removed

  • somebody forgot to explain the exit hole after three buildings, but somebody remembered to make the enginees disappear on the simulation.

  • thank you God that most of the people are not stupid.

  • In response to most of the commenters:

    That day, for the first time in recorded history, two jet aircraft vaporised on impact...one with the ground in Virginia, the other at the Pentagon.

    The wall is there, look more carefully at the simulation. The question you should ask is why didn't the fully fueled wings leave any *fuel* outside the walls.

    The original version of the video did, indeed, talk about 9/11. They changed it to discuss their software, very likely under some kind of pressure.

  • Well, there's the proof it wasn't a plane.

  • no need to include c ring punch out.

  • Note in the animation, the right wing engine misses the generator.

  • Actually Flight 77 and 93 were both Boeing 757s, but basically the same aircraft, in size, etc.

  • Great vids, but there one big problem.

    The simulate show ving crashed pentagon without engine??

    I supose those engine would do HEAVILY damage than the vings.

    This simulate is waste of time and it not a evidence at all because you haven't included two engine.

    trying to fool us??

  • they basically are, the truth is, that not only the damage doesn't resemble a jetliner crash, but the fact alone, that this jet flew this low, and fast is so far fetched. No plane hit the Pentagon period.

  • @Airportchris2 How do you know what the damage would look like?

  • @PantzMaster76 Of course u do except heavily damage from those two engine wouldn't you? And this simulate doesn't show *any* engine damage.

  • @PantzMaster76 Ummm, common sense?

  • @koford How do you know what the damage would look like?

  • @PantzMaster76 It's not so much of what, it would look like. But the fact that it, isn't there at all.

  • this video pretends the concrete wall wasnt there in an attempt to hide the fact that the wings would have snapped off and remained outside the building

  • Actually, this video SHOWS how much visible damage should have remained after the crash.

    I think Purdue must've been squeezed, because I recall a different video with commentary using this simulation where the whole idea was to disprove the administrations claim it was any kind of passenger liner that hit the pentagon.

  • Its all bullshit, don't be fooled, Uncle Sam is raping are ass's and laughing about it!

    The government was be every aspect of what happend!

  • This is something wrong with this simulation. The outer wall is invisible. Meaing the wing's never touch the outer wall, they go through them using majic. Must be glitch in the matrix? or mabe a plane never the pentagon.

  • simulation matches to the damage shown at 2:26. No holes where the engines went through, just like in the simulation there's no engines.

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more