blackguard19

Judy Wood is a ridiculous disinformation shill.

Newton's 3rd Law states that flying a plane into a stationary building would be the exact same effect as taking a building going the speed of a plane and ramming it into a stationary plane. The plane would crumple like a tin can, which is what should have happened on 9/11. You still would have to answer the question of how the plane was able to fly faster than physically possible at that altitude.

And notice how that straw is sticking out of the soft tree bark, it has not penetrated entirely into the trunk. Thank you for illustrating my point.

doginventer

Yes, fuck of a red pill this one, but even if it was another model of aircraft, and modified, it still doesn't look right that the wing tips cut through 4" structural steel and the body went through to the other side of the building

blackguard19

Hell, not even the nose would have punched through the building. Maybe the engines would have flown in but the rest of the plane would have crumpled like a tin can and fallen down the side of the building.

I saw an interesting video the other day about how the nose going through the other side was an error in video compositing, the CGI plane was supposed to disappear when it reached the exact middle of the frame but the camera moved so the "plane" went too far, and that's why the screen went black right after it happened.

blackguard19

A hollow 150 ton aluminum aircraft traveling much slower than a bullet cannot melt effortlessly into a 150,000 ton steel and concrete reinforced structure like it's going through a big block of butter (violates Newton's 3rd Law). The other physical impossibility is that if you calculate the plane's speed using frame analysis, it's literally going faster than Boeing jets of that kind are capable of going at that altitude, so this is aerodynamically impossible.

They needed an excuse to set off explosions to destroy the towers and used CGI/ video compositing to make the goyim think there were planes. If you'll notice I also posted many eyewitnesses saying there were no planes. Even the reporter from CNN said there was "no evidence of a plane having crashed anywhere near the Pentagon" after his "close-up inspection" and he obviously later recanted this.

The Pentagon is way easier than the twin towers so maybe you should start there. There was obviously no plane. You can't seriously assert that the Pentagon, certainly one of the most secure buildings in the world where you couldn't take a piss on the lawn without being caught on 15 different camera angles, couldn't have any footage or photos from security cameras of a plane. There is even a hole much too small for a Boeing 767 with the words "punch out" spray painted right next to it, would you believe how obvious this is.

I know it sounds hard to believe that no planes hit the towers but physically impossible events do not happen. Much research has been done about this in the last 15 years and you'll need better protests than "I saw it on tv" or my favorite "I know a guy who knows a guy who knows a guy who saw it."

OrangeKraken

In real life or on TV?

blackguard19

I watched Jurassic Park on tv, it doesn't mean there are dinosaurs now.

The laws of nature can't be violated. What you see is physically impossible therefore did not happen.

blackguard19

There have been conspiracies involving more people than that, so what? Do you even think any planes hit any buildings that day?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5Dl5jIdtdk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7BNqgNvUhRQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GffVvYFrtPM