Video credit Bjørn Authén, a structural engineer.

This may help. Missiles not planes, and the 2 jets that fired them, their shadows pass across the towers shortly after, at the 6 second mark. Citizen raw video.

It's BIRDS @Punkbudgie_ 2nd time I suggest you read this... What hit the Twin Towers on September 11, 2001? The ongoing 25 yearlong argument should have been put to bed in 2007 Article:

Many of them afterwards are birds, but the 2 jet shaped shadows on the towers are triangular not bird shaped. If you only take one version of events and discard all others as you appear to be doing. That is not research, it's dogma.

Suggested reading @Punkbudgie_, then listen to the podcast. Illusion of Reality and the 9/11 Planes Is seeing believing, or believing seeing on 9/11? Article: Podcast with Jerm Warfare:

Yeah I had my fill of the JermWarefare gov asset years ago, that's why no serious researcher follows him anymore.🙄

🤣🤣🤣 @Punkbudgie_ Ad hominem does not take away from the evidence presented by 9/11 Planes Research, aka Mark Conlon... Illusion of Reality and the 9/11 Planes Is seeing believing, or believing seeing on 9/11? Article:

There are no planes, it was CGI streams directly by big media and the few eyesights where bought. This was a controlled implosion from the bottom to the top like a chimney. controlled destruction plan was executed and sold as terrorist attack to hide money laundering and invade other nations for ressources

Time to rethink your stance @tg_amc What hit the Twin Towers on September 11, 2001? The ongoing 25 yearlong argument should have been put to bed in 2007 Article:

Time to challenge what you think you know @tg_amc Nukes - The distraction behind door no 3 Official narrative – Jet fuel. Option behind door no 1 – explosives, door no 2 – thermite, door no 3 – buried or mini nukes. Just don’t look at where the EVIDENCE points to, a black-ops cold DEW technology, that can direct energy to disrupt the molecular bonds of matter. (Direct or control – where it goes and what it does) The Veterans Today presentation by Heinz Pommer was quite a theoretical feat but puts the cart before the horse. It appeared he failed to ask the question: What happened? Dr. Judy Wood exhaustively describes what happened (before the coverup which began immediately). Pommer's theory was pretty much blown away by Wood's presentation. The giant cavern below the WTC complex was formed during geologic times not by a nuke on 911. Videos of the basement below the towers show that there was little damage to the infrastructure in the basement and people walking through it without encountering any of the mythical pools of molten metals. A nuke below each tower would surely have damaged the walls of the 'bathtub', the dyke that held the Hudson back, which would have flooded Manhattan. There was no evidence that there was any heat energy released in the collapses which Pommer said would have been necessary to melt the steel. Steel, by the way, glows bright red before melting. We did not see any red-hot steel or any evidence of extreme heat. Cars appeared to burn but the piles of paper on the ground did not combust. Dr Wood had to be 'cancelled' because she was right. Not the best presenter, but a hell of a structural engineer who immediately saw what nobody else did and spent years trying to get the word out. Ironically, it was the '911 Truth' movement who took her down. They could not rebut the evidence she gathered so they ignored it (Covid anyone?). Wood's book, Where Did the Towers Go? "Evidence of Directed Free-Energy Technology on 911" introduces the evidence, that the work of Nicola Tesla had been used in the process. Watch: 9/11 Alchemy - Facing Reality Rumble Link: YouTube Link:

@tg_amc People always love to follow those who put on a good show, especially when it confirms their existing bias. The A&ETruth hoaxters are very slick, full of certitude, and have a knack for stroking their followers egos. People love that combination.

@tg_amc I know the feeling @sarahskye 🤣

But this is what happens when a aircraft collides with a firetruck.

Dude ... it's like passing through a sieve. But with a f*ckton of fuel on top of that. Most of the components of the plane went in because the plane is coming with lots of speed/energy and its shell is fairly soft. Then the fuel caused that huge explosion. Nothing strange here.

You really need to read this @SorinBota_X, as your thought process about this is way off. Come, challenge yourself, read the article. What hit the Twin Towers on September 11, 2001? The ongoing 25 yearlong argument should have been put to bed in 2007 Article:

Dude ... a tungsten projectile is extremely hard and will penetrate deep. But it's a TINY fraction of the mass that airplane had. At that speed and mass, even a balloon filled with water would punch a hole through that building. Kinetic Energy is (mass x velocity x velocity)

What I wonder about is whether a plane made of soft aluminum basically behaves like a liquid when impacting at that speed. Like the impact shatters the plane into tiny bits, and the bits behave like a fluid with really large molecules. I'm the first to admit that the plane dissolving into the building looks sus, but maybe that's just what happens. It would be like hitting a water balloon really hard with a tennis racket: most of the water would go right through. There would still be some splashing back mind you.

@SaiyanVegeta420 @RobGoodall6 @911Revisionist That "wile e coyote" hole punched through is because the fuel is stored in the wings. And that's what punched a hole. The actual inertial damage probably came from the landing gear, which at that speed is like a huge steel projectile. The rest of the plane was irrelevant.

Creating the plane shaped holes on 9/11 explained @SorinBota_X, in this clip from the documentary. here is a 9/11 "crash course" for you. Watch: 9/11 Alchemy - Facing Reality Rumble Link: YouTube Link:

It was CGI

Sorry @21_North_ close but no cigar. Suggested reading. What hit the Twin Towers on September 11, 2001? The ongoing 25 yearlong argument should have been put to bed in 2007 Article:

BlueBeam The planes were half the width of the buildings, how can they crash over 3/4 in stead the real width? Explosives and projections.

Creation of the plane shaped holes @2Be2Gether2 Watch: 9/11 Alchemy - Facing Reality Rumble Link: YouTube Link:

Thanks for your effort. Why: - The passports of the cessna flyers where found - The 4th plane that crashed in the ground had no planecrash format - the pentagon had no camera surveillance - the cessna pilot knew the exact spot to crash the Rumsfeld administration

-Delta airlines had major put options on their stocks - WTC7 wend down as a controlled demolition - Silverstein wasn’t in the building just like his daughter - the dancing Israëlish at the collapse - the dustification of metal - the nose came undamaged out - it stinks allover.

Let's correct your second last point @2Be2Gether2 Nose-Out vs Dust Explosion? An Independent Video Analysis Article:

“In the shape of a plane” sure, there were no six steel columns in the middle. Read “Where did the towers go?” Danny Jowenko 24-7-2007

Apply yourself by also reading the article before you comment @2Be2Gether2 Building 7 didn't go down due to fires or controlled demolition. Truth seekers have been bamboozled by the "trusted experts" for nearly 2 decades. Article:

Truth:

This what happens to plane when it hits a firetruck

😎

There's glass between all that metal framing, isn't there? What happens when the airliner hits glass? I would suggest the glass disintegrates, and that part of the plane keeps moving. Agree?

Both of you, @MarciBudai & @ApolloEvid3029, need to read this. What hit the Twin Towers on September 11, 2001? The ongoing 25 yearlong argument should have been put to bed in 2007 Article:

This is what happens to the nose of a commercial plane going much slower vs. a fire truck but on this particular day structural steel engineered to withstand an earthquake was no match.

Building number 7 was a controlled demolition... there isnt any other way to explain it. so if it was staged, they all were.

The Government, or more accurately the Military, has had AI for a ½ century or more now. Keep that in mind when witnessing these "planes" morph into these buildings. It's turn of the century AI...

A bird, a fire truck 🚒 and a building went into a bar….

Hi im an aerospace engineer, work on commercial aircraft, did large scale stress and cfd research as a student. This plane is going very fast, and weighs a lot. The momentum alone would stop it from “bouncing” off the tower. The momentum carries debris forward into the building.

Great @LUVIERN_UCF you're an aerospace engineer, struggling with basic physics... Revisiting Flight 175 – Let’s listen to what Professor Morgan Reynolds’ 2007 Qui-Tam case against NIST for SCIENCE FRAUD on the 9/11 plane impact studies was about. Let’s also listen to aeronautical experts that argue that the 9/11 planes couldn't reach the reported 540+ mph at sea level, due to thrust, drag, and structural limits. Ben Eadie – Aeronautical Engineer, Dr Willem AJ Anemaat – PhD Aeronautical Engineering, Capt Gordon Wilson – Aeronautical Engineer / Aviation Consultant, John Lear - a Retired airline captain and former CIA pilot with 17 world records, including Speed Around the World in a Lear Jet Model 24 set in 1966. He flew secret missions for the CIA in Southeast Asia, Eastern Europe, the Middle East and Africa between 1967 and 1983 and for 17 years of his career he worked for several passenger and cargo airlines as Captain, Check Airman and Instructor. He was certificated by the FAA as a North Atlantic (MNPS) Check Airman. He also had extensive experience as command pilot and instructor in the Boeing 707, Douglas DC-8 and Lockheed L-1011. In short - He knows WTF he's talking about. Discussing air pressure, drag, aerodynamics and then let’s also look at the fraudulent NIST airplane impact report as well as the planted airplane fuselage and debris at the WTC complex… And by the end of the video, SAIC and their “specialization in impacts and explosions” and you’ll see they gave NIST fraudulent impact reports pertaining to the “planes” that supposedly hit the towers. 2007 Court filings by Dr Morgan Reynolds against NIST: Full documentary here: 9/11 Alchemy - Facing Reality Rumble Link: YouTube Link:

If the basis of your entire argument rests on the analysis of one man, and not the larger scientific snd investigative community, you are most likely wrong.

One man? @LUVIERN_UCF Ben Eadie – Aeronautical Engineer, Dr Willem AJ Anemaat – PhD Aeronautical Engineering, Capt Gordon Wilson – Aeronautical Engineer / Aviation Consultant, John Lear - a Retired airline captain and former CIA pilot with 17 world records, including Speed Around the World in a Lear Jet Model 24 set in 1966. Are they all one man? 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

There are over 300 technical experts and over 4000 investigators who conducted the investigation into 9/11. If i took the time I could give you 30 lists like the one you have given me.

@SendMe1776

Lucky Larry’s best day ever 9/11 was an inside Job and the twin towers were ritualized attacks. The number 11 and the symbolism of chess boards both have intriguing connections to the occult. In numerology, the number 11 represents intuition, spiritual insight, and the gateway to higher consciousness. It is seen as a bridge between the physical and spiritual realms. —- PDF & Book:

You do know buildings are 90% just air? That's like, the whole point of buildings?

Rubbish, kinetic energy produced by the plane slices the building like butter: Ek = ⁠1/2 ⁠mv² m of 767 ~180000kg, v ~250 m/s 5 625 000 000 J => 5.6 GIGA joules This energy is exerted in a forward direction ONLY. ALL of it, through the wing tips & nose. Absolutely brutal.

Here is a 9/11 "crash course" for you. You're welcome. @jobsts Watch: 9/11 Alchemy - Facing Reality Rumble Link: YouTube Link:

What's the best documentary that debunks 9/11?

here is a 9/11 "crash course" for you @JBeltler60129 Watch: 9/11 Alchemy - Facing Reality Rumble Link: YouTube Link:

You have two options and ONLY two options. 1. It happened as shown. 2. There were no planes in ANY of the 9-11 crash sites. I'm with option #2

Yall are crazy. I’m a mechanical engineer and I can promise a jetliner brought down those towers. A fully loaded 767 weighs 390 thousand pounds and they were traveling around 450 mph. Or 244 meters per second. That’s a force of almost 4 giga joules or .91tons of TNT. Now let’s compare to the Massive ordnance penetrator GBU 57. Do you think one of those could take down the Tower? Well Israel has none but use our smaller version the GBU 28 and regularly knocks down building and it’s 6 times smaller than the 57. Essentially one 767 has similar kintec impact force as the GBU57. We they differ is the explosion release but we are not counting that. The release of energy from the fuel around 100GJ but not explosive like the GBU57. Their is plenty of kinetic impact force to shear though the exterior beams, aluminum and make it to the core which was the main structure. As the subsequent columns on the exterior were severely damaged and the fuel continued to burn each column continued to overload and each beam the same until the top 20 floors overloaded the connectors of the beams to the core.

Anyone else catch this?

Someone with enough money, could recreate the conditions of 9/11. A 10 meter high mockup of WTC 1 and then remote in a 767 at 500 mph and note the results.

please explain to me how aluminum planes can go through a quarter inch thick fourth flange box column high density seal reinforced by 2 feet deep spandrel plates and steel truss reinforced concrete floors, multiple of them and not turning into punching your feet

I will agree with you that this is very strange and I have no idea what to make of it

Most of that tower was air. Most of that plane was also air. The tower wasn't a wall. The plane wasn't a rock. The video footage makes sense.

🤔

@Bobb13Dazzl3r There’s now way a potato can go through a metal structure: