The no planes theory requires many leaps of logic. And explanations for eyewitnesses as well as pyrotechnics.
It's plausible, but not the most realistic IMO.
When it first came out there were many other 9/11 documentaries coming out at the same time questioning various aspects of the event.
September clues was roundly lauded as disinformation since it left many questions unanswered in a time when the 'truth' movement was trying to gain credibility and look serious by trying to prove what the public may accept in order to get a better investigation. This was the idea of architects and engineers for 9/11 truth. It was meant to sit on concrete facts that could be proven.
Video forensics as well as special effects has come a long way in a lot of ways since 2001. It's possible it was faked using different techniques available at the time. And would explain why it took several days before video came out, (creating, editing, perfecting footage) however this was also before camera phones were prevalent so it's not that abnormal for there to be not very much video.
I guess I was always just wary of September clues and remember reacting to it in a negative way.
I completely agree with you. It's highly suspicious though when you synchronize the time the "planes" hit from multiple angles, and see two completely different trajectories, one being a straight path, the other being the "dive bomber" path.
And yeah, special effects most certainly have come a long way, but there's of course tech that the government has that we don't know about. Great effects plus mediocre person using it won't give you a great outcome.
It is good though to try to seek the truth using all available avenues.
And the mainstream media networks using the same origin feed, then they just so happen to use their own high ups to give credibility to the lie? I don't understand why I didn't see that at the time.
Now all thatsaid there are certain things it points out, like you said, the plane trajectory, but also the nose out the other side of the building, the missing wing on one plane going 'behind' a building, other graphical oddities do keep me wondering if they did do something like superimpose a plane over a missile, but again it brings up many other questions that start requiring complex explanations.
u/#q23 u/#q67 u/#q117 u/#q118 u/#q154 u/#q259
Seems like another lifetime ago.
septemberclues.info
I shed a few tears, drank a whole 200mL bottle of Jim Beam, and for the first time in my life wanted to smoke a cigarette, but didn't.
The whole fucking thing was a lie. We've been lied to about so much.
Use discernment with September clues....
Why?
The no planes theory requires many leaps of logic. And explanations for eyewitnesses as well as pyrotechnics.
It's plausible, but not the most realistic IMO.
When it first came out there were many other 9/11 documentaries coming out at the same time questioning various aspects of the event.
September clues was roundly lauded as disinformation since it left many questions unanswered in a time when the 'truth' movement was trying to gain credibility and look serious by trying to prove what the public may accept in order to get a better investigation. This was the idea of architects and engineers for 9/11 truth. It was meant to sit on concrete facts that could be proven.
Video forensics as well as special effects has come a long way in a lot of ways since 2001. It's possible it was faked using different techniques available at the time. And would explain why it took several days before video came out, (creating, editing, perfecting footage) however this was also before camera phones were prevalent so it's not that abnormal for there to be not very much video.
I guess I was always just wary of September clues and remember reacting to it in a negative way.
That's why I suggested using discernment.
I completely agree with you. It's highly suspicious though when you synchronize the time the "planes" hit from multiple angles, and see two completely different trajectories, one being a straight path, the other being the "dive bomber" path.
And yeah, special effects most certainly have come a long way, but there's of course tech that the government has that we don't know about. Great effects plus mediocre person using it won't give you a great outcome.
It is good though to try to seek the truth using all available avenues. And the mainstream media networks using the same origin feed, then they just so happen to use their own high ups to give credibility to the lie? I don't understand why I didn't see that at the time.
Now all thatsaid there are certain things it points out, like you said, the plane trajectory, but also the nose out the other side of the building, the missing wing on one plane going 'behind' a building, other graphical oddities do keep me wondering if they did do something like superimpose a plane over a missile, but again it brings up many other questions that start requiring complex explanations.
just wait till you find out about the holocaust
Loose Change is InfoWars-tier stuff. I wouldn't hold on to much of it. But yes, 9/11 was an inside job.
10 years ago, I'd ask if you're fucking crazy for thinking 9/11 was an inside job.
15 years ago, I'd question it.
Today... yeah, 9/11 was an inside job.