So You telling me that this(A plane's nosecone that was hit by a bird) cut straight through a steel exoskeleton and reinforced concrete...AND came out the other side virtually intact...Yeah OK...😏😏
(media.greatawakening.win)
*** SEE TOP COMMENT ***
https://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-updates/incidents/unbelievable-images-show-damage-to-plane-after-a-bird-strike/news-story/ac95d59c235831528a9e6bbcd84d5f19
I'm just making this post because of some really Unbelievable comments I saw yesterday in a couple of posts... Just this ONE example should tell you all you need to know...A Single BIRD made of feathers and a few bones did this...Now, what do you think A Steel & Concrete building would do??... It certainly would NOT slice straight through leaving a distinct outline of the plane in the exterior of the building...
https://rumble.com/v1jnzw1-nine-eleven-2019-documentary-banned-on-you-tube.html
Watch the video, Frens, and then tell me planes were involved in 911. You have raw footage and Hollywood footage. You have slowed down video that shows the plane melting into the building. Really? Explosives were planted in the towers and missiles hit the Pentagon and crashed in Shenksville. What these 4 sites all have in common is that there were no plane parts. It's time people start thinking about what really happened rather than going with the MSM narrative from 21 years ago.
Purkiss why are we always getting people from shithole countries? Why not South Africans? Every single one of you that I've met are Trump supports and very keen and awake. Great post.
Thank you....
Not if the plane was retrofitted and equipped with a bunker Buster bomb in the nose cone. This bunker Buster bomb was developed at Egland Air Force base, the same place where Dov Zakheim was retrofitting Boeing 767 into Air Force refueling platforms (cover story). They claim they developed it this weapon in 4 months, when in reality it was used on 9/11 at the World Trade Center in the two drones that flew into the buildings. This explains the large levels of radiation that lingered for months at ground zero. This also explains the exit out the opposite side of both towers. Depleted uranium turns into Molten plasma at impact.
https://youtu.be/KJTq9yb_Zow
1 - My main point is we are supposed to believe that "passenger Airlines" flew into buildings full of passengers...😏 2 - Where did the almost perfect outline of the plane come from?? it looked like something that you would see in a 'Roadrunner' cartoon??...
And it doesn't account for rhe way the building fell I to its own co trolled footprint.
Wait till he finds out the space station is on earth.
What do they do to a building before they demolish it?
That's been my exact mind set.
How heavy are those bombs? And would a passenger plane be able to remain in flight with one retrofitted to it's nose??
lol. Are you serious?
Seems like a reasonable question seeing you'd be adding roughly 2 tons (at a minimum) to the nose of the plane.
You think one of these bombs weighs 4000 lb? What is the takeoff weight of a 767?
2 tons - 15 tons. That's a heavy nose:
https://www.google.com/search?q=Buster+bomb+average+weight&rlz=1C1GCEA_enUS909US909&ei=zIIfY5CbK9esqtsPyoWhyAs&ved=0ahUKEwiQseCM-Y_6AhVXlmoFHcpCCLkQ4dUDCA4&uact=5&oq=Buster+bomb+average+weight&gs_lcp=Cgdnd3Mtd2l6EAMyBQghEKsCOgoIABBHENYEELADSgQIQRgASgQIRhgAUOYJWMoaYPodaAJwAXgAgAG0AYgBrQqSAQMwLjiYAQCgAQHIAQjAAQE&sclient=gws-wiz
These planes were retrofitted drones. They were not passenger airliners full of passengers. Retro fitted drones. Any number of modifications would have taken place to not only strengthen the planes but to make them lighter. Also, any High ordinance explosive could been of similarly decreased in weight. Kinetic energy of the Drone would have carried it into the building.. the thing about depleted uranium Warheads is they leave a large radioactive footprint in the immediate vicinity, which is exactly what we had on 9/11. A limited hangout story about basement nukes was deployed to explain it.
Listen, I aint saying this wasn't the case. I'm just talking through it being the first time Ive heard this theory.
No problem, it is my own theory so I dont mind explaining how I came to this conclusion
Sure, but it wasnt.
Plane = Hollow Aluminum tube
Precisely...
Doesn't mayer. 767 weighs ~300000 lbs at takeoff.
Meh...good point. But the towers were still designed to withstand impacts like that.
Correct...They were designed with that in mind... The Twin Towers were designed to withstand 150-mph hurricane winds. Dr. Thomas Eagar of MIT likened the impact of the 9/11 airliners on the towers to “a bullet hitting a tree” — negligible.
In a White Paper circulated in 1964, the engineers claimed that the design of the Twin Towers could survive the impact of a 4-engine jetliner at 600 mph at the time of impact.
In 1993 the chief engineer, John Skilling, told the Seattle Times that the towers would not only survive the jet impact, but would survive the fires as well.
https://www.quora.com/Were-the-Twin-Towers-designed-to-withstand-an-airplane-crash?share=1
Again, what is the first step before a building is demolished?
There are two things that are at odds here. People saying there's no way a plane would penetrated the structure and they were brought down in a controlled demolition
Wire it with explosives?
All structures are significantly weakened.
300k of paper thin aluminum is still paper thin aluminum. Sure the plane has insane energy/force at speeds, but the plane itself cant handle that force and shreds itself absorbing much of the energy in the process. That is why most commercial airliner wrecks look like someone dumped out thousands of bins of trash around a few more solid piece. Don't usually see huge holes in the ground...
No. There are laws to kinetic energy. The material doesn't matter. I have personally seen STRAW (as in actual strands from a pile of hay) embedded THROUGH a 4x4 piece of wood. With enough energy the material will pass through and into another material without deforming until it meets a certain threshold. Same thing here.
The MASS x SPEED is what's important.
The wings were full of fuel, not empty aluminum balloons
The engines each weigh ~6 tonnes or so
The twin towers were constructed so that a plane could not possibly take them down. Never in the history of tall buildings has one ever collapsed because of fire.
The Empire State Building was struck by a bomber, and the plane just stuck in the side of the building. Construction people removed the plane and patched up the building, which is still standing.
There's no way that planes took down the twin towers. It doesn't matter what the planes were made of, what they contained, how fast they were, or even if they were just holograms. The towers fell from a controlled demolition.
👌👍
Oopsie...
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FZjwa0NXwAEKRpL?format=jpg&name=small
😆😆😆Exactly...And how fast was that plane going??
About, err- ~18mph
And where are the 1000 gallons of fuel they allegedly store in the wings? Strange.
Lol too funny
Oh but, after it came through completely intact, they never found the wreckage!
Exactly. No wreckage anywhere that day. Only passports lol. Although 12 years later multiple news stories pop up about a 5 foot piece of landing gear wedged between two buildings (one’s even a mosque). If we entertain the theory that the kinetic energy carried the planes straight through those buildings surely there’d be more evidence than a rusty piece of apparent landing gear found over a decade later. Then there’s the Pennsylvania field and the Pentagon: not the tiniest scrap of plane parts to be found. Even if we entertain the theory that the nose cones contained bunker buster bombs are we meant to believe the planes simply vaporised?
Edit: I now remember they apparently found an engine not belonging to a 767.
Regardless, planes did not bring those 3 buildings down. Controlled demolition is clearly the best explanation.
Also...Yes...👍😏😉
Retarded post. The nose cone is made of fiberglass. Most bird strikes happen on approach/takeoff where the aircraft is at slow speeds. The aircraft struck the towers at 580 mph. Learn how kinetic energy works. At the bottom of the towers, the steel was almost four inches thick, but, as the load tapers on the way up, the thickness of the steel required also tapers. At the 79th floor, where the first plane impacted the WTC, the steel was only 1/4" thick.
Also, I personallysaw the 2nd plane.
THE MORE YOU KNOW.
Cats, I'd like to sit at your feet and listen to what you have to say on this topic. Please direct me to previous threads containing your wisdom on this subject.
Haha, I hear your sarcasm but hey, what can I say 🙄😂
Oh, Cats! I'm not being sarcastic at all; I'm dead serious. You're claiming first-hand knowledge, which I happen to hold in high regard. Seriously, I would love to read your account.
Well, other than the fact that I was there, I don't have much else to say. I've been in all these buildings (at one time you could sign up for a tour of the Salomon Smith Barney trading floor). I've just read all the studies and understand the basic physics. I went to journalism school in the midwest. One time I Category 3 tornado was roaming around and destroyed a hardware store. We found 3 ft lengths of PVC pipe that the wind had slammed into and 100% through a telephone pole. That's The Power of this kinetic energy I am talking about. Anyway. Back to the salt mines!
Let me say again, and again and again and again. All buildings that are brought down in controlled demolitions are significantly weakened. Remember the Israeli art team running around the towers in the months before 9/11? Remember the numerous reports of dust and loud sounds of construction on closed floors?
Exactly...This notion that Planes were solely to blame for the Towers collapse is complete BS....There is so much info/facts out there and people still believe its the fucking "hijacked planes" ....just like at the Pentagon...The Destruction caused by the 'plane's impact' would have meant the plane would have had to be almost Ground level....Some fucking piloting skills there for a Part-time pilot wouldn't you say?...
This. There's NO way the buildings were brought down with the impacts. The Architects of the buildings even said so themselves on video, stating that they had specifically designed the buildings to withstand the impact of a fully loaded 707, which was at the time the largest aircraft in the air. Absolutely not, you are correct. There is absolutely no way to explain, for instance, all the molten steel that was coming up out of the ground for weeks and weeks and even months afterwards.
This. The thermite was necessary to weaken the outer structure. The steel beam mesh on the outside of the building was 40% of the load. The squibs were from the termite and cutters. The nuclear plutonium charges were magnetically focused inwards on the core (which is where the molten steel came from). Look up the BB18 image
Seriously??.... So I'm Retarded for showing facts.?? Really..Pictures showing the crumpled nose of a Boeing 737 following the dramatic MIDAIR impact!.... Not Slow speed...
https://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-updates/incidents/unbelievable-images-show-damage-to-plane-after-a-bird-strike/news-story/ac95d59c235831528a9e6bbcd84d5f19
I also refer you to this Pic.... it was travelling at a slow speed and didn't even 'dent' the pole https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FZjwa0NXwAEKRpL?format=jpg&name=small
Remember the almost perfect outline of the Airplane where it penetrated the outside...Are you trying to tell me that the wings cut through steel and concrete like wet newspaper to leave a distinct outline of the aircraft???..... Also, I didn't say that there were no Aircraft...I'm saying that Aircraft are not the cause of the Towers Collapsing....There's a difference...
Exactly. The plane was going at a slow speed. The kinetic energy is what cuts. Look up YouTube videos of dudes throwing playing cards into baseball bats. Same principle
Edit - look at how water jets work. How does water cut 2" steel??
And that's looks like an aluminum pole.
Again, its in the heading of my post...You just reinforced the FACT that a nosecone would just crumple coming into contact with ANY object let alone penetrating steel and concrete, going all the way through and then exiting the other side of steel and concrete (even as the steel was only 1/4" thick) INTACT as we all saw... And you call my post Retarded???? I'm all up for different opinions but that's pretty much insulting a lot of people's intelligence....
No. At sufficient speeds it is a matter of kinetic energy.
Want to insult your intelligence? What determines the cutting speed/energy needed to cut a material? The speed of sound in that material. Look it up. Travelling sufficiently fast, s tiny object can penetrate anything. ONLY when it slows past this threshold the penetrator will begin to deform.. This is how bunker buster bombs work
Precisely....Yet it (2nd plane)went straight through the entire tower and came out the other side...INTACT...Remember...How's that possible???
Dude. This is "personal incredulity" fallacy. Just because something sounds unbelievable doesn't make it not true.
Look at the tests NASA did, shooting shuttle fuel tank insulating FOAM at models of the shuttle wing. It penetrated something like two feet into an exact replica of the wing before deforming/breaking apart
Kinetic energy is king
LOL no it didn't, it went through and deformed along the way. The MASS x SPEED is what matters at impact. The only reason anything came through on the 2nd impact is because it was an oblique angle impact where a large portion of the plane missed the concrete/steel lattice core. I personally saw the landing gear from the impact
And the steel is super thick!
I was shocked when I saw a piece of the building up close. They have a display at the atomic museum in Las Vegas.
Wrong. See top comment
The steel might be 1/4in thick (kinda want to see a sauce in that anyway), but the structure of I-beams give it amazing strength. Then on top of that the configuration of the I-Beams with each other.....
Are you talking about the WTC buildings here? If so then quarter of an inch is a bit of an underestimate.
Don't believe those conspiracy theories! I say photos of the steel beams where the aluminum planes cut through those beams in 45 degree angles like butter! KEK
They were military planes, probably using hardened aluminum and titanium.
Here are they shooting bullets at such metal https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8i8wzFtaMXU
These planes were switched during the transponder-blackout perfectly outside radar tracking. Info can be found at pilots for 911 truth.
Engines were found that were standard for military planes, but not for civilian planes. The IDs of the engines were not civilian.
looks like a composite nosecone from my experience.(look at corvette crashes). and I think that you mean endo-skeleton... edit sorry misread your post not thinking about building...
😆...All good...
Just a couple days ago in here some dude in here swore that weight and speed made it possible. Smh
I guess everyone forgot about the engine they found stuck between two narrow streets that somehow managed to get there, but wasn’t even the same engine used in the planes that supposedly hit the buildings. Or the famous indestructible passports that belonged to the terrorists lol
maybe the planes did hit and were just an excuse to detonate the explosives without anyone being suspicious.
It'd be like shooting a gasoline filled soda can (out of a cannon) into a steel girder and having the girder disintegrate instantly on contact.
It doesn't even make sense.
Exactly....
Wrong. See top comment.
I'm comparing a modern airplane to a soda can you dork. Do you really not get the analogy?
No, because it's not analogous. Airplanes aren't empty shells of aluminum as you imply. Their engines weigh 8-15 tonnes each. They have hardened steel infrastructure at the landing gear and wing roots. Grow a brain. Learn how both planes and analogies woork.
Get bent
GEOTUS is playing WWG1WGA soundbites over the most dramatic parts of his speeches. Which one of us is 'getting bent,' bud?
Think hard. Think really, really HAAAARD.
I like that.
I was making a remark how the official 9/11 story is ridiculous, but that was completely lost on you. I don't even caaaare. So yea, get bent.
No, you were making a remark about "MuH aIrPlAnEs ArE jUsT tOoObZ". Leave the thinking to the adults if that's your schtick.
Nice non-sequitur btw