I'm not really convinced, he turned away and the plane hit the other side.
Yeah, i know, old fucking news for us niggerfaggots in the know.
But this video is very good to show the uninitiated.
Yeah, i know, old fucking news for us niggerfaggots in the know.
But this video is very good to show the uninitiated.
I'm not really convinced, he turned away and the plane hit the other side.
My first thoughts too, but wouldn’t his mic have caught the inbound sound of a jet going 550 mph (?) that low to the ground?
My first thoughts too, but wouldn’t his mic have caught the inbound sound of a jet going 550 mph (?) that low to the ground?
Not on a cheap jvc camcorder with so much background noise, you can't even make out the sirens.
Not on a cheap jvc camcorder with so much background noise, you can't even make out the sirens.
Maybe so. I can make out some siren, not clearly above the background and wind noise. He is in more or less a canyon so lots of ricochet going on. It’s unfortunate he turned the camera away. Tough to make a hard call on it.
Maybe so. I can make out some siren, not clearly above the background and wind noise. He is in more or less a canyon so lots of ricochet going on. It’s unfortunate he turned the camera away. Tough to make a hard call on it.
His microphone caught something that could have been the sound of an oncoming plane just before the explosion. It’s hard to tell though. There is lots of background noise and he was turning the camera in a different direction, so his microphone may have been briefly getting wind noise.
His microphone caught something that could have been the sound of an oncoming plane just before the explosion. It’s hard to tell though. There is lots of background noise and he was turning the camera in a different direction, so his microphone may have been briefly getting wind noise.
The turning away of the camera at that moment makes it really hard to say for sure one way or another. Dammit.
The turning away of the camera at that moment makes it really hard to say for sure one way or another. Dammit.
Also the "super slow-mo" analysis was not done on the original footage. It's done on a video that has been artificially time-stretched. Time stretching adds missing frames using a prediction algorithm that is not very accurate. So you have a computer "guess" what a frame (or several frames) might look like between two actual frames of the original video. This guessing will produce glitching and artefacting. Therefore to use a time-stretched video for actual forensic analysis is just..., well, it's frankly retarded. Something like that would never be admissible in court for example.
The fact that doctored footage was used for "evidence" in this video, shows the creator is either not aware of how digital time-stretching works, or he is being dishonest. Either way, it discredits him from being any sort of expert in video forensics. Show me the original undoctored footage, and then we can look again.
Also the "super slow-mo" analysis was not done on the original footage. It's done on a video that has been artificially time-stretched. Time stretching adds missing frames using a prediction algorithm that is not very accurate. So you have a computer "guess" what a frame (or several frames) might look like between two actual frames of the original video. This guessing will produce glitching and artefacting. Therefore to use a time-stretched video for actual forensic analysis is just..., well, it's frankly retarded. Something like that would never be admissible in court for example.
The fact that doctored footage was used for "evidence" in this video, shows the creator is either not aware of how digital time-stretching works, or he is being dishonest. Either way, it discredits him from being any sort of expert in video forensics. Show me the original undoctored footage, and then we can look again.
You surely don't believe an airplane crashes into a building like the video shows? Melts into the bldg.?
Aside from your other statements.
You surely don't believe an airplane crashes into a building like the video shows? Melts into the bldg.?
Aside from your other statements.
Well you tell me. From 18 different angles:
https://youtu.be/7YLm3pkAiJQ
The guy in the OP video was located in such a way that he could not see any plane, whether there was one or not. So that video is not evidence of anything. In addition it uses disingenous video forensics, like I said, which gives me a smelly smell of the whole narrative in the video.
Also, none of these no-plane videos explain the angled gash that was formed at the impact site, nor do they explain the trajectory of the debris, which is consistent with the momentum of an impact on the other side.
So yeah, to me the evidence points to a plane, possibly loaded with explosives. I don't buy the no-plane theory at all, but I don't mind changing my opinion if better evidence surfaces. So far the evidence is lacking, poor quality and poor analysis, and poor deductive reasoning used. Not convincing.
Well you tell me. From 18 different angles:
https://youtu.be/7YLm3pkAiJQ
The guy in the OP video was located in such a way that he could not see any plane, whether there was one or not. So that video is not evidence of anything. In addition it uses disingenous video forensics, like I said, which gives me a smelly smell of the whole narrative in the video.
Also, none of these no-plane videos explain the angled gash that was formed at the impact site, nor do they explain the trajectory of the debris, which is consistent with the momentum of an impact on the other side.
So yeah, to me the evidence points to a plane, possibly loaded with explosives. I don't buy the no-plane theory at all, but I don't mind changing my opinion if better evidence surfaces. So far the evidence is lacking, poor quality and poor analysis, and poor deductive reasoning used. Not convincing.
You surely don't believe an airplane crashes into a building like the video shows? Melts into the bldg.?
So you're saying "the science is settled, we have a consensus"? That's not very skeptical or scientific of you. You want there to be no planes involved because that supports your preferred bias and theories. That does not make for truth. We have to question everything with 9/11 because the real truth is complex and obfuscated to hell. Don't let your passion cloud you skeptical judgment. Explore every angle because after all, if you believe DEWs and Tesla weapons are plausible explanations, then airplanes and explosives are as well.
>You surely don't believe an airplane crashes into a building like the video shows? Melts into the bldg.?
So you're saying "the science is settled, we have a consensus"? That's not very skeptical or scientific of you. You want there to be no planes involved because that supports your preferred bias and theories. That does not make for truth. We have to question everything with 9/11 because the real truth is complex and obfuscated to hell. Don't let your passion cloud you skeptical judgment. Explore every angle because after all, if you believe DEWs and Tesla weapons are plausible explanations, then airplanes and explosives are as well.
So what, there are plenty of videos showing an explosion with no plane.
So what, there are plenty of videos showing an explosion with no plane.
Show me any of them an I can probably point out that it's the opposite side that got hit and that the approach was obscured by another building and that the camera wasn't looking at the correct area to prove or disprove anything just like this video. I'm not rejecting 9/11 being a false flag attack, I'm affirming that there would be no point to claiming it was planes and not using planes, two old planes would have been far cheaper and more attainable than the cost of ILM level CGI and silence in 2001, not to mention doing it live or in just 10 minutes would have been impossible, people claiming video effects or CGI are ignorant of post processing and rendering time. You have an argument with the pentagon but not the twin towers, they used real planes, if they had used CG planes why did the CG for tower 7 not work then, makes more sense that a hijacked plane meant to target the building went down in a field in Pennsylvania, likely shot down after the passengers gained control.
Show me any of them an I can probably point out that it's the opposite side that got hit and that the approach was obscured by another building and that the camera wasn't looking at the correct area to prove or disprove anything just like this video. I'm not rejecting 9/11 being a false flag attack, I'm affirming that there would be no point to claiming it was planes and not using planes, two old planes would have been far cheaper and more attainable than the cost of ILM level CGI and silence in 2001, not to mention doing it live or in just 10 minutes would have been impossible, people claiming video effects or CGI are ignorant of post processing and rendering time. You have an argument with the pentagon but not the twin towers, they used real planes, if they had used CG planes why did the CG for tower 7 not work then, makes more sense that a hijacked plane meant to target the building went down in a field in Pennsylvania, likely shot down after the passengers gained control.
Dude, you need to go look. You obviously haven't done any, any research at all. People from the balconies, from the top of parking garages, in cars going by all capture the explosion...but no plane. They are CGI planes. Depending on the network, the right wing disappears right before impact, another the left disappears, another the tip of the left wing goes behind the building in the background then comes back out, another the entire froot half of the plane has merged with the building up to the front of the engines with zero fragments or impact.
Dude, you need to go look. You obviously haven't done any, any research at all. People from the balconies, from the top of parking garages, in cars going by all capture the explosion...but no plane. They are CGI planes. Depending on the network, the right wing disappears right before impact, another the left disappears, another the tip of the left wing goes behind the building in the background then comes back out, another the entire froot half of the plane has merged with the building up to the front of the engines with zero fragments or impact.
I'm not really convinced
Are you being serious here? Or are you joking?
> I'm not really convinced
Are you being serious here? Or are you joking?
I tuned in in time to see the second tower hit live, the fireball would have passed through and come out the other side if it were a fuel explosion, I'm not saying planes dropped the towers in free fall, and I know there was plane fuckery on the day, but I've heard too many witnesses who were there and saw the second plane hit, people I've known personally or just dudes I met on xbox.
That video is super inconclusive, if he had held on the towers the whole time, maybe, but he looked away, so why was he claiming he saw it?
I tuned in in time to see the second tower hit live, the fireball would have passed through and come out the other side if it were a fuel explosion, I'm not saying planes dropped the towers in free fall, and I know there was plane fuckery on the day, but I've heard too many witnesses who were there and saw the second plane hit, people I've known personally or just dudes I met on xbox.
That video is super inconclusive, if he had held on the towers the whole time, maybe, but he looked away, so why was he claiming he saw it?
>I've heard too many witnesses who were there and saw the second plane hit, people I've known personally or just dudes I met on xbox
Yeah I've heard others say the same, hard to figure this out.
I always tell people, look at master illusionists, they have crazy tricks than can fool anybody...imagine what the intel people have.
>>I've heard too many witnesses who were there and saw the second plane hit, people I've known personally or just dudes I met on xbox
Yeah I've heard others say the same, hard to figure this out.
I always tell people, look at master illusionists, they have crazy tricks than can fool anybody...imagine what the intel people have.
I'm not a no plane theorist but I'll tell you a story of when I was 17.
Was watching the news and I see this guy is holding up traffic. He got out of his car in heavy traffic and news was reporting a hostage situation.
Local news got a helicopter on the scene.
The guy got out, put a gun to his head, and killed himself, and it was right there on live TV.
The next day at school everyone was talking about it. Everyone saw it. Even myself.
Finally I talked to somebody who, made me realize I internalized the gunshot, and had not actually seen it. I was making a handgun to my head reenactment like everyone else, assuredly.
The reality was I was looking at the live tv broadcasts but looked away at that moment.
We reenacted the suicide and we kept reenacting with a finger pointed to the temple, like he shot himself in the temple.
But the guy, I later learned, got on his knees with a rifle or shotgun to his face, and pulled the trigger.
By the time I had the story corrected, I had shared my version of how he died 20 times.
Made me realize that I mass formed my own experience.
Imagine how much confusion I would have if cgi video existed of a pistol instead of a long gun.
I'm not a no plane theorist but I'll tell you a story of when I was 17.
Was watching the news and I see this guy is holding up traffic. He got out of his car in heavy traffic and news was reporting a hostage situation.
Local news got a helicopter on the scene.
The guy got out, put a gun to his head, and killed himself, and it was right there on live TV.
The next day at school everyone was talking about it. Everyone saw it. Even myself.
Finally I talked to somebody who, made me realize I internalized the gunshot, and had not actually seen it. I was making a handgun to my head reenactment like everyone else, assuredly.
The reality was I was looking at the live tv broadcasts but looked away at that moment.
We reenacted the suicide and we kept reenacting with a finger pointed to the temple, like he shot himself in the temple.
But the guy, I later learned, got on his knees with a rifle or shotgun to his face, and pulled the trigger.
By the time I had the story corrected, I had shared my version of how he died 20 times.
Made me realize that I mass formed my own experience.
Imagine how much confusion I would have if cgi video existed of a pistol instead of a long gun.
What the camera is pointing at isn't necessarily where the cameraman is looking himself.
I can't imagine the camera pointed away because he just then decided to stare at the ground next to him. Looks to me like he was fixed upon the buildings above him on fire, and let the camera drift before the explosion.
Also, what about all the other footage showing no plane in OP's video?
What the camera is pointing at isn't necessarily where the cameraman is looking himself.
I can't imagine the camera pointed away because he just then decided to stare at the ground next to him. Looks to me like he was fixed upon the buildings above him on fire, and let the camera drift before the explosion.
Also, what about all the other footage showing no plane in OP's video?
yeah same, all i know, is that i know nothing. (:
yeah same, all i know, is that i know nothing. (:
I'd be kicking myself for the rest of my life for turning the camera away at that critical moment.
I'd be kicking myself for the rest of my life for turning the camera away at that critical moment.
The weirdest thing is... The ones who were 911 truthers were the leftists.... The ones that were against GMO, and factory farms.. leftists. the ones that wanted to move into the woods and live off grid, leftists.
that was the 90s at least.. Now, the corporate boot-lickers are the leftists.
The way things change...
The weirdest thing is... The ones who were 911 truthers were the leftists.... The ones that were against GMO, and factory farms.. leftists. the ones that wanted to move into the woods and live off grid, leftists.
that was the 90s at least.. Now, the corporate boot-lickers are the leftists.
The way things change...
Yeah, that wasn't the left at all. The left has been consumed with globohomo and global warming for 40+ years at this point.
The lineage of idiocy is impressive when it comes to liberals.
Yeah, that wasn't the left at all. The left has been consumed with globohomo and global warming for 40+ years at this point.
The lineage of idiocy is impressive when it comes to liberals.
I'm more talking about those who vote for the left, not the politicians who always were trash.
I'm more talking about those who vote for the left, not the politicians who always were trash.
Yes, crazy.
Yes, crazy.
There is only one party: The Banking Party
"left" and "right" is an illusion.
There is only one party: The Banking Party
"left" and "right" is an illusion.
This needs a permanent global sticky.
This needs a permanent global sticky.
No planes.
Building 7 collapse was the real wtf moment.
No planes.
Building 7 collapse was the real wtf moment.
Thank you for sharing this. Saving local copy.
Thank you for sharing this. Saving local copy.
Israel did 911. They blew the towers up with nanothermite explosives planted by Israeli demolition experts disguised as art students and elevator repairmen. They also used mininukes in the basements where the steel support beams were bolted to the bedrock.
The hijacking were staged at airports controlled by Israeli security firms. The very real jets that hit the towers were specially modified remote controlled planes and acted as cover for the controlled demolition.
The "no-planes" theory is classic (((CIA))) disinformation meant to muddy the waters and make truth seekers and sceptics look ridiculous.
Israel did 911. They blew the towers up with nanothermite explosives planted by Israeli demolition experts disguised as art students and elevator repairmen. They also used mininukes in the basements where the steel support beams were bolted to the bedrock.
The hijacking were staged at airports controlled by Israeli security firms. The very real jets that hit the towers were specially modified remote controlled planes and acted as cover for the controlled demolition.
The "no-planes" theory is classic (((CIA))) disinformation meant to muddy the waters and make truth seekers and sceptics look ridiculous.
Anyone think it was DEWs that brought down the towers?
Anyone think it was DEWs that brought down the towers?
Can you explain how a DEW attack would work to produce the effects that are shown in the video? I think it's important to explain how it works in order to make the scenario plausible and distinct from conventional explosives.
Can you explain how a DEW attack would work to produce the effects that are shown in the video? I think it's important to explain how it works in order to make the scenario plausible and distinct from conventional explosives.
Probably you've heard of Dr. Judy Wood? She's the one that got me thinking about DEWs.
I couldn't explain like her, I'm far from an expert on DEWs (who is?)
Probably you've heard of Dr. Judy Wood? She's the one that got me thinking about DEWs.
I couldn't explain like her, I'm far from an expert on DEWs (who is?)
https://duckduckgo.com/?va=e&t=hc&q=dr.+judy+wood&ia=web
I couldn't explain like her, I'm far from an expert on DEWs (who is?)
But that doesn't stop you from suggesting they were used. kek.
>I couldn't explain like her, I'm far from an expert on DEWs (who is?)
But that doesn't stop you from suggesting they were used. kek.
Dustification technology from Nikola Tesla.
Dustification technology from Nikola Tesla.
Exactly. There was no collapse, no rubble, no reports of seismic activity, the "bathtub" structure that kept NYC from flooding wasn't touched, paper not burning, cars flipped upside down, bent steel, on and on.
Posting for whomever...
Exactly. There was no collapse, no rubble, no reports of seismic activity, the "bathtub" structure that kept NYC from flooding wasn't touched, paper not burning, cars flipped upside down, bent steel, on and on.
Posting for whomever...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mXG6bDh632o
Yep. One of the main items found in the rubble of the towers was toilets, because porcelain has a different resonant frequencey, and thus wouldn't have been dustified alongside the steel beams, etc.
Thanks for sharing the video.
Yep. One of the main items found in the rubble of the towers was toilets, because porcelain has a different resonant frequencey, and thus wouldn't have been dustified alongside the steel beams, etc.
Thanks for sharing the video.
Can you explain how Tesla's 'dustification' technology works? What kind of physical forces, energy levels involved and power delivery system is used to accurately target a section of a building like that and work in a split second without violating the laws of thermodynamics?
Can you explain how Tesla's 'dustification' technology works? What kind of physical forces, energy levels involved and power delivery system is used to accurately target a section of a building like that and work in a split second without violating the laws of thermodynamics?
Look into it for yourself. I'm not doing your homework for you.
"Tesla Dustification technology" will get you there.
Look into it for yourself. I'm not doing your homework for you.
"Tesla Dustification technology" will get you there.
Good video, when I've posted evidence of this (no planes) a bunch of kikes on poal kvetched up a storm. It's really weird how many people agreed with them, there are photographs of explosives being installed inside the WTC buildings. Then there's building 7 and 9 which jus randomly blew up and collapsed.
old fucking news for us niggerfaggots in the know.
Eh, fewer than 10 on poal understand no planes hit. They're too busy slobbering on nigger dicks to care.
Good video, when I've posted evidence of this (no planes) a bunch of kikes on poal kvetched up a storm. It's really weird how many people agreed with them, there are photographs of explosives being installed inside the WTC buildings. Then there's building 7 and 9 which jus randomly blew up and collapsed.
>old fucking news for us niggerfaggots in the know.
Eh, fewer than 10 on poal understand no planes hit. They're too busy slobbering on nigger dicks to care.
They're too busy slobbering on nigger dicks to care.
Fuck you, now i had to find an excuse for why i laughed out loud at work... Kek
>They're too busy slobbering on nigger dicks to care.
Fuck you, now i had to find an excuse for why i laughed out loud at work... Kek
Only a true negro loving faggot would laugh at a nigger dick comment (especially out loud).
Only a true negro loving faggot would laugh at a nigger dick comment (especially out loud).
One of the best, thanks (put together well).
Know what? If I show this to most (if I can even get them to watch) they will not believe it and if it indeed makes some inroads into their psyche they just don't care, and don't care to look further.
After all, American Idol is on TV tonight and it's, you know, the big finale.
One of the best, thanks (put together well).
Know what? If I show this to most (if I can even get them to watch) they will not believe it and if it indeed makes some inroads into their psyche they just don't care, and don't care to look further.
After all, American Idol is on TV tonight and it's, you know, the big finale.
Leventhal still works for FOX ..lol Tucker was a big 9/11 govt narrative guy as was Hannity O'Rielly
the FOX network brought "conspiracy theorists" on to make them look like they were crazy ..they had our beloved Hannity and O'Rielly make the look uninformed so the sheeple never asked questions about 9/11 but their truth tellers ..lol
Tucker is beginning to soften his stance but the network as a whole is propaganda
Leventhal still works for FOX ..lol
Tucker was a big 9/11 govt narrative guy
as was Hannity
O'Rielly
the FOX network brought "conspiracy theorists" on to make them look like they were crazy ..they had our beloved Hannity and O'Rielly make the look uninformed so the sheeple never asked questions about 9/11
but their truth tellers ..lol
Tucker is beginning to soften his stance but the network as a whole is propaganda
(post is archived)