Or just the cgi part. Seems hard to fake that if there’s many people who personally saw the planes and caught it on camera. In the busiest city in the US
Two historical events have mesmerized me since 2017 – JFK assassination and 911 attacks. I have read numerous books, visited hundreds of websites, and watched untold numbers of videos on Rumble and YouTube.
I have read two dozen books on 911 alone from David Ray Griffin, Kevin Ryan, Webster Griffin Tarpley, Mark Gaffney, Chris Bollyn, Thierry Meyssan, Eric Hufschmid, Dr. Judy Wood, Andrew Johnson, Philip Marshall, Jim Marrs, William Veale, Francis Richard Conolly, Jim Garrity, Laurent Guyenot, Paul Landis, Michel Chossudovsky, Ian Henshall, James Fetzer, Kevin Barrett, Victor Thorn, and more.
I find it incredibly challenging to synthesize this content and draw conclusions succinctly against the official cover story and mainstream media disinformation. Until of course, the emergence of ChatGPT AI assistant.
I experimented with some straightforward questions and here is the output from ChatGPT. There are a million other questions one could ask but I thought the following 5 questions give a taste (no edits with any of the text so bear with the length of the answers) (disclaimer: all mistakes are ChatGPT’s, not the author’s).
ChatGPT sucks. It mentions at least twice that Larry Silverstein making an insurance claim after the attack is standard business practice and no proof of foreknowledge of the attack. No shit, woke search engine. The interesting part about Lucky Larry’s insurance is the over-insured policy taken out shortly before the attack. Also, ChatGPT doesn’t mention Lucky Larry’s physical whereabouts on the morning of 9/11 and how it diverged from his normal routine. Sure, it’s not definitive proof, but another miracle whose improbability multiplied by all the other improbabilities makes the overall probability of the official story vanishingly small.
ChatGPT also overlooked other inconvenient facts. ChatGPT was programmed by commie dweebs to try to trick people into thinking that they’ve given issues the proper consideration.
All this goes to show is that if you train an A.I. on garbage, it will produce garbage.
I have explained the "impossibilities" repeatedly in these pages, from the standpoint of straightforward engineering physics and chemistry. The "impossibilities" are simply a willful failure to understand the science of the event. Nature does not countenance impossibilities.
At least all it had to say about Israeli involvement was "people speculate." Which is no closer to truth than nothing at all.
Example "impossibility" (my favorite): "burning jet fuel cannot melt steel." Steel (iron) melts at a temperature of 1538 C. Kerosene (jet fuel) in air has an adiabatic flame temperature of 2093 C. Need I say more? To continue, this is not much different from the adiabatic flame temperature of anthracite coal (nearly pure carbon), or 2180 C. How do we get molten iron commercially? By production in blast furnaces by the burning of coke, which is essentially pure carbon. Lots of molten iron. The interiors of the Twin Towers made them essentially furnaces fed from drafts below and exhausting in drafts upward. Not only can burning jet fuel melt steel, it can easily melt aluminum at a temperature of 660.3 C. (I've seen photos of airplane crashes where the fuselage has clearly been melted by the resulting fire.) Molten aluminum is not boiling, but it will evaporate aluminum vapor, which can ignite and burn at an adiabatic flame temperature close to 3732 C. That will contribute to the temperature environment. (In my junior high school metal shop, we used to produce molten aluminum for casting by putting it in a tub bathed by a common heating gas flame. Aluminum is a major constituent of modern composite solid propellant for rockets, accounting for the dazzling incandescent exhaust.)
So, that "impossibility" is pretty thoroughly debunked. But I expect to get plenty of downvotes from those who elevate "common sense" above college chemistry.
Not a "shill." Just an aeronautical engineer who is cognizant of the physics and chemistry of the situation. I notice you have no refutation, thus proving my point.
You never have points, just mumbo jumbo faux science that is similar to MSM attempts to gaslight the public.
Who cares what your expertise is if you are only going to use the "title" in order to hide the truth, you know like all them doctors who told us how great the vax was.
The point is that the "impossibility" is a fable. The information is pertinent and correct; it is not "mumbo jumbo faux science." I have three degrees in the relevant engineering fields and have worked combustion chemistry as part of my specialty. Guess what? The "MSM" accounts are probably correct. And, having no refutation, you resort only to disparagement and calling me a liar.
I take your unfounded accusation as an extreme insult. It reveals only how deeply committed you are to prejudice.
The one reason is to dispel nonsense, such as the example I debunked. None of these comments have any refutation, because there is none. You get your basic facts wrong and derive incorrect conclusions. I should think that, as lovers of truth, you would be concerned not to go down a false path. But you are in fact allergic to the truth, because it upsets your "theory." Not very scientific.
Nothing strange about the fact that the airplanes had enough mass to go through glass window panes and light facing structure. What were you expecting? That they would go "splat" like in a Warner Brothers cartoon? That's pretty much how it went when a B-25 Mitchell bomber crashed into the Empire State Building in 1945.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1945_Empire_State_Building_B-25_crash
"...and light facing structure." It would still be the same. Ever seen a potato forced through a french fries cutter? The potato simply vanishes into it...and comes out french fries. From one crash simulation I have seen, that is exactly what happened to the airplanes, the columns cutting through wings and fuselage alike. I guess you are not familiar with what the construction of the WTCs does to a colliding airplane.
You give yourself away by not reading closely. And by not looking up what happened to that B-25.
Thermite + CGI + nonstop narrative = 9/11
Two down votes still believe the government narrative.
Or just the cgi part. Seems hard to fake that if there’s many people who personally saw the planes and caught it on camera. In the busiest city in the US
That is the most perplexing thing to me. CGI/Advanced Holograms or Aluminum greater than Steel
https://x.com/BGatesIsaPyscho/status/1891967665662468215
All those clips recorded by people were shown by the media.
Yes, and some of those videos are what led people to think it was some type of advanced hologram.
Because it was being edited.
what do you mean?
Very dasting post Tells!
Ask it about GWB role in this event. Then also ask about GHWB role. Then do Cheney and Rumsfield.
I Asked ChatGPT About 911 and Here Are the Q&As ChatGPT is more honest than New York Times Hua Bin • February 22, 2025
https://www.unz.com/bhua/i-asked-chatgpt-about-911-and-here-are-the-qas/
Thank you, Tellstruth, for posting this- has great info!
ChatGPT sucks. It mentions at least twice that Larry Silverstein making an insurance claim after the attack is standard business practice and no proof of foreknowledge of the attack. No shit, woke search engine. The interesting part about Lucky Larry’s insurance is the over-insured policy taken out shortly before the attack. Also, ChatGPT doesn’t mention Lucky Larry’s physical whereabouts on the morning of 9/11 and how it diverged from his normal routine. Sure, it’s not definitive proof, but another miracle whose improbability multiplied by all the other improbabilities makes the overall probability of the official story vanishingly small.
ChatGPT also overlooked other inconvenient facts. ChatGPT was programmed by commie dweebs to try to trick people into thinking that they’ve given issues the proper consideration.
Carl Cameron's four part Fox News Special Report on Israeli espionage in the United States
All this goes to show is that if you train an A.I. on garbage, it will produce garbage.
I have explained the "impossibilities" repeatedly in these pages, from the standpoint of straightforward engineering physics and chemistry. The "impossibilities" are simply a willful failure to understand the science of the event. Nature does not countenance impossibilities.
At least all it had to say about Israeli involvement was "people speculate." Which is no closer to truth than nothing at all.
Example "impossibility" (my favorite): "burning jet fuel cannot melt steel." Steel (iron) melts at a temperature of 1538 C. Kerosene (jet fuel) in air has an adiabatic flame temperature of 2093 C. Need I say more? To continue, this is not much different from the adiabatic flame temperature of anthracite coal (nearly pure carbon), or 2180 C. How do we get molten iron commercially? By production in blast furnaces by the burning of coke, which is essentially pure carbon. Lots of molten iron. The interiors of the Twin Towers made them essentially furnaces fed from drafts below and exhausting in drafts upward. Not only can burning jet fuel melt steel, it can easily melt aluminum at a temperature of 660.3 C. (I've seen photos of airplane crashes where the fuselage has clearly been melted by the resulting fire.) Molten aluminum is not boiling, but it will evaporate aluminum vapor, which can ignite and burn at an adiabatic flame temperature close to 3732 C. That will contribute to the temperature environment. (In my junior high school metal shop, we used to produce molten aluminum for casting by putting it in a tub bathed by a common heating gas flame. Aluminum is a major constituent of modern composite solid propellant for rockets, accounting for the dazzling incandescent exhaust.)
So, that "impossibility" is pretty thoroughly debunked. But I expect to get plenty of downvotes from those who elevate "common sense" above college chemistry.
Gotta love a shill who continues to gaslight this forum.
Not a "shill." Just an aeronautical engineer who is cognizant of the physics and chemistry of the situation. I notice you have no refutation, thus proving my point.
You never have points, just mumbo jumbo faux science that is similar to MSM attempts to gaslight the public.
Who cares what your expertise is if you are only going to use the "title" in order to hide the truth, you know like all them doctors who told us how great the vax was.
The point is that the "impossibility" is a fable. The information is pertinent and correct; it is not "mumbo jumbo faux science." I have three degrees in the relevant engineering fields and have worked combustion chemistry as part of my specialty. Guess what? The "MSM" accounts are probably correct. And, having no refutation, you resort only to disparagement and calling me a liar.
I take your unfounded accusation as an extreme insult. It reveals only how deeply committed you are to prejudice.
He's only here for one reason. To stir the pot. Deport.
The one reason is to dispel nonsense, such as the example I debunked. None of these comments have any refutation, because there is none. You get your basic facts wrong and derive incorrect conclusions. I should think that, as lovers of truth, you would be concerned not to go down a false path. But you are in fact allergic to the truth, because it upsets your "theory." Not very scientific.
Why would you deport someone who is correct?
No not you. The handshake. Look at its other comments. Its just here to stir shit up.
Your comment is irony at its finest.
u/#glowie
Gifs of moment of impact where the planes appear to melt into the tower
https://x.com/BGatesIsaPyscho/status/1891967665662468215
Nothing strange about the fact that the airplanes had enough mass to go through glass window panes and light facing structure. What were you expecting? That they would go "splat" like in a Warner Brothers cartoon? That's pretty much how it went when a B-25 Mitchell bomber crashed into the Empire State Building in 1945. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1945_Empire_State_Building_B-25_crash
Guess you are not familiar with the construction of the WTC's.
You give your shilling away when you say it just went through some glass.
HaHaHa
"...and light facing structure." It would still be the same. Ever seen a potato forced through a french fries cutter? The potato simply vanishes into it...and comes out french fries. From one crash simulation I have seen, that is exactly what happened to the airplanes, the columns cutting through wings and fuselage alike. I guess you are not familiar with what the construction of the WTCs does to a colliding airplane.
You give yourself away by not reading closely. And by not looking up what happened to that B-25.