The final nail is my own nail. Well people have put many nails in this coffin. I will now add my own nail and seal it shut forever.
Now lets talk about physics and ballistics.
Lets throw around some absurd illogical ideas like force, density, and time, as this relates to collisions.

I)DURING A CRASH.
During a crash, force itself can be seen as moment to moment transition of mass and energy. All mass is fixed unless acted upon. Material types, strength and malleability, tension, and weight are important real factors in determining collision outcome.

The building, the external part of the building was made of made of steel columns interlinked together. With large concrete slabs.

In order to cut those columns or penetrate, force must be applied moment to moment (nanoseconds here) upon the steel colum during the hit. In order to actually go through the column it must exert sufficient force in a mannor that can slice through the steel. The simple problem as pointed out. Is that airplanes are made of aluminum. And it is AN OPEN STRUCTURE. An aircraft does not bear weight. Cannot bear weight. Cannot crash. Is not crashworthy. So how does it possibly exert the forces needed to cut the steel. The answer is it doesn't. It is 100% impossible.

II)THE TOWER
Made of massive steel sections, interlinked, like a steel catchgrid woven together. Like a kevlar vest. Only steel. Concrete floor slabs. Supermassive structure. A collision is partially elastic collision would occur. The tower as a whole supports the whole tower, materials have some give and deformation.

III.)A REALISTIC EXPECTATION
a)Fruitcake de-bunkers will tell you things like. "Remember the planes were going so fast and massive enough, that anything can be used as a weapon if its' going fast enough" WRONG. LIE. Passenger planes are about the shittiest penetrating object imaginable. They are lightweight. They are made of alumniu, they are an open structure ect.
When we see car crash tests at 50 mph we see a car. THAT CAN'T FLY. hit, ripple, buckle, react, makes a loud sound ect.
When we see a car crash at 200mph and it hits the wall on the racetrack, the car flies apart, shreding itself. It is not designed to fly either. And it is built to withstand crashes.
Planes are built to fly...
Made of aluminum, hallow, generally shred when they hit things.

b)A realistic expectation is to see the nose hit and shred, all the way up to the wings, destroying itself. The nose is the softest part of the plane. It breaks in half. And the back end and tail section carthweel over and slam flat up against the building hitting the colums. Aluminum shrapnel spews out.into the building as it's deflected off and torn apart by STEEL COLUMNS and concrete.

c)Want one more nail. That should end all debate forever on planes and on 9/11. Watch the crashes again. The plane hitting the building at 500mph would release a HUGE AMOUNT of energy. It would be loud. There would be a shockwave and rippling, breaking and tearing. The wings would break off, a lot of the plane would be rejected and so on. But the kicker is that we don't even see the energy released on the face wall where the collision takes place. MORE EXPLOSIVE ENERGY is seen coming OUT THE BACK AND SIDE. During that second strike. This therefore 100% illogical to say we are seeing a crash when all of the energy must be released during impact.

It's like being shot, and then saying a few moments later the damage will happen. WRONG. All energy is released during the IMPACT event itself. The nanosecond to nanosecond mass collision and materials interaction. PERIOD.

IV)FURTHER BALLISTICS
a)Little fairy debunkers will say things like. A jet moving at that speed will release X amount of GJ of energy equivalent to 2000 lbs of TNT. Well. In 1993, there was a real bomb of 1500 lbs of explosive in the basement of the world trade center. And it didn't sever a single significant load baring column. The damage was superficial. And as I've state in point c) we do not see a significant amount of energy released on the facewall itself where a REAL COLLISION would have taken place.

b) the 2000lbs of explosive figure is for an instantaneous supermassive ball. The 2000lb of energy or whatever applies if it it were 140 ton cannon ball moving at 500mph. This is why bullets are solid. However, when a Fucking Boeing hits, it is a long object, the 2000lbs of explosives is released slowly, mostly into the plane as it shreds itself. During a protracted and messy impact event. The steel has it easy. In fact so easy, that it has time to resist the impact. The amount of energy actually on the steel moment to moment is equal to that energy pressing into the fucking Boeing. So how much force can the airplane push back before being destroyed? About relatively NONE AT ALL. Think back to those bird strikes.

c)Rant on: But you have these wankers who act like ballistics experts. So lets talk ballistics. DENSITY. Make your bullet of the densest material possible, in order to cause the greatest moment to moment momentum transfer. Get the object going as fast as possible. REAL BULLETS that are solid and dense - like made of copper, or lead, or uranium - Probably would bounce off most pretty simple standard steel plates at velocities sub 1500 feet per second. IOW. below that velocity you have a bullet that's almost useless... oops.
So how good of a bullet is a bullet at 500mph? Well, that's 733 feet per second, the answer is not good at all.
And now you want this bullet to be made of?? ALUNIUM? where steel is 2.5 times as dense as solid aluminum. Haha joke I say. And you want your aluminum bullet to be hallow. And you want it to penetrate steel at velocity of 733 feet per second... Now I'm really cracking up. Now I'm dying of laughter.

d)In our mad rush to "Hunt down these terrorist killers" we have forgotten. (Kinetic Energy) K=1/2 mv^2. So that V is squared right. 733^2 =537,289 vs 1500^2 =2,250,500. So it takes 4 times the velocity we saw on 9/11 to touch steel if using a ballisticly sound projectile. A fucking Boeing is not that.

e)A fucking Boeing is:
A lightweight structure built out of aluminum and fiberglass and plastic paneling. What do you think happens to the open structure? when it hits the building do you think it does dip shit to the steel column? Do you think it comes out the other side like we saw?

f)Conclusion. bullets are, Solid. Dense. Massive. Energetic. And designed to interact with an intended target. Hallow point bullets are not used to penetrate steel. But to shoot people for example. Planes not good ballistic weapons period, and interact with heavier denser objects by tearing themselves apart.


So keeping all that in mind. It's strange that so many people saw planes hit the building, and how fast we knew it was bin laden... HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-eP3pJ4ANw

Here Eric Shawn reveals he's one of the perps.
The plane hits, and the newscaster names Bin Laden in 42s. Shorly after that Mr. Shawn, a Fox News Contributor and Cocksucker, shows up to give his interpretation of the events. He's a security expert. And BY GOLLY, wouldn't you know it, he happened to be outside walking, maybe hear the plane, maybe it was an air bus, and then he goes rationalizing and explaining calming and soothing, laying down the official story of planes. He talk about turns, and planes flying through this area all the time. And of course they point out how this is 'Clearly a deliberate act' of flying these jets into buildings.


My buddy came over and gave this analysis:
"This is their eternal blunder. It's all tape. The physics is all there. This is what will damn them. The very planes they put in those videos. This was a MASSIVE oversight. They planned this how many years... yet in oversight, things are always missed. They were too fucking stupid because they wrote it like a movie to sell it to their target audience. This whole aircraft idea. They were so overzealous, and greedy and stupid, they didn't even realize it was physically impossible or were arrogant enough to do it anyway. And it worked... for a time. But these men. Their time is up.

Even Condi Rice, the dumb bitch remarks remarks that "no one could have anticipated people flying aircraft into the towers." That's right, you zealous fucking pigs didn't think, and now we are gonna have ourselves a pig roast.

And you,
Eric Shawn, you little fucking cocksucker.
Ohhh Eric. It looks bad buddy. There were no planes buddy. And here you are on Live TV reading a script, you fucking slime ball. You are tarred and feathered. your game is up, I have just crucified you... This will live on, everyone will know. This is like the deathblow to the western myth and it's decadent stupidity."


And then after all this. I encourage you to read the fable here with all it's shiny legitimacy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/...ptember_11,_2001_attacks

Do you trust your judgment on this. Is my judgment sound? Or do you think wikipedia and Eric Shawn got it right? Do you think that CNN video is real with it's lack of energetic collision. Game over.

-NS

"Here's what demolition experts use in steel framed buildings, the linear shaped charge ... It generates around 3,000,000 psi pressure ... at a speed in excess of 27,000 feet per second ... There are over 1000 different types of explosive ... With the use of delays we can control ... where the debris lands ... vibration ... noise level."

I dont know what relevance 9/11 has to do with DMT or anything you just posted there with the general nature of this board. But it strikes me too, that the towers were also an open structure. If they were made of solid steel you might have a point. But they wern't. Although the frame work was steel most of the bulk of the buidings was glass and plaster board. They were open structures designed with lots of empty space so you could put people and office furniture and stationary etc in them. I saw those pictures of planes crashing into the sides of the buildings and the buildings come crashing down and like 99.99% of the rest of the world believe that a plane can do that to a building.

It has to do with having an open mind and open belief system. And turning on people to it, who are open to seeing it.
The videos have been proven to be fake.
So Even if it did hit the tower... you have fake videos to deal with.
The contradiction of the buildings being open structures or the planes being able to do it, does not correspond with anything that happened on 9/11. Live shots from the day proove no plane.
I posted pictures of birds knocking holes in hallow wings and sub ballistic velocities and you are telling me it caused the tower to collapse?
It's a scam, please give this a shot.

re:it caused the tower to collapse?
Hell no. It collapsed at freefall speed, Straight down, a Plane didn't do that (even if the fule really did melt
the steel supports the floors would have come down a lot slower and the steel beams would have been left standing)

But your aplication of ballistics is absurd. The pictures seem consistent with my knowledge of physics
Plane impacts weak outer stucture (733 fps) certainly does look fake just disapearing like a hot knife through butter,
Then it is torn apart by the steel central beams, the fule is at this point is liberated from the fule tanks
and kaboom!... out the other side.

re:you have fake videos to deal with.
Every man and his dog got footage of the second plane .... All fake ???


re:It has to do with having an open mind and open belief system. And turning on people to it, who are open to seeing it.

Sounds like the best kind of cult.
It only works if you belive it works

you're close Dead Lizard. I know it's very hard to look at and see it this way if you are unfamilar with doing so.

I can address your argument, that yes, it is possible that the plane or plane material enters the builing and then causes the fireball. But in other situations where planes have crashed into buildings, the external is made of things like plaster and insulation. This is a different case. the WTC were rather uniquely impenetrable to airplanes because of the steel exoskelleton as well as core. See some pictures here.
http://9eleven.info/911JonesPaperhtm7.htm

the main argument is that the plane simply is not affected. And the main event is still upon impact itself. They found plane parts that WENT THORUGH the bulding. If you can believe that. I mean that alone outright disproves planes I think. The plane parts in the street some 1000 feet away.

Shock and awe. It's a psychological technique, and it worked on me for years too. I didn't even give 9/11 a second thought until late 2005.

I don't even mention the fact that at sea level or nearly, we (researchers) are reasonably sure the boing cannot travel at the speed. It likely cannot exceed 350mph at sea level. The videos show a plane between 500-600mph. This is passenger plane and it's not possible to have those sorts of speeds. Also the videos, real videos that captured the hit, the audio, no audio has anything sounding anything like a jet. Other videos have silly airplane sounds put in, that sound nothing like airplanes. These videos are fake. Many shots showing planes hit the towers have been 100% proven fabrications.

The key is to understand the vidence for video and TV fakery.
Then have a good look at the black blobs put in that were supposed to be airplanes. And the camera movments of the camera men are rediulous. Even holding a handheld digital camera that can take movies zoomed in all the way. I had no problem shooting very stable video of what I was aiming it. It's technique the way they wiggle the camera all over in Cloverfield.

And the stuff about the neutron bomb or whatever is very speculative. The planes thing is not. The planes thing is too basic and straightforward. I researched this topic for two years, and dismissed people who claimed there were no planes because I never even looked at it really. Once I got. It's like the final piece of the puzzle slides into place.

It's not just some 'comspiracy stuff' or where you say it's like a cult and believe it or you don't. I mean, either the planes can enter buildings or they don't. There is very little wiggle room for the possibility of aluminum slicing these external steel colums as we saw. It's just not possible. And this is the leading of 9/11 research.

Take an empy can, whip say the back of a knife into it. You will see the buckling and tearing in the aluminum can, but none in your steal object - in fact, it does not deform at all. The can you can see flat marks where the metal was smashed flat from the impact. Like if you hit a coin with a hammer to flatten it out. You can't flatten out a steel coin with a hallow aluminum hammer.
Have a good think about it. This is hard to accept if you are new to it. I'm the ex skeptic preaching this message by the way.

The first time I heard someone even say 9/11 was an inside job I thought it was the stupidist idea I'd ever heard. But things are ironic like that, people must see this. It's all over youtube, and videos get yanked down all the time, and serious researches get harassed and threatened.

It took me a month to move from 'plane hugger' to accept the fact that there were no planes. A month of really looking at it. And this is my conclusion. I'm not asking for people to read this and suddenly say OMG you're right. But JUST LOOK AT IT. This is a forum where people should be very open minded to looking at this sort thing.
It needs to spread, or I'll go mad preaching a message no one can hear.

Or heck. "just listen zeee german men with their rational brains explain zee twuth of nieneeleven."
http://www.911blogger.com/node/14050
This documentary is a germany documentary on 9/11 and it's quite good as well as witty and amusing at times. Just like I say, Give it a good look.
In the 60's acid was called "Hey try this man" (Cheech Marin says this on the Tom Green show)
Well, now I'm saying that you, "try this man. See if it fits." And remember keep an open mind.

There's hosts of other problems too. Like for example all the concrete was destroyed, into micron dust. This is well known. Perhaps watch this video of MIT Engineer Jeff King giving his honest opinion trying to explain the unprecedented destruction.
http://video.google.com/...ocid=1822764959599063248

And watch that german doc it's one of my favs for sure.

-NS

Your! bloody crazy :O

Why are u spending so much of your energy on this when clearly it did happen.... This reminds me of those silly people that deny the Jewish holocaust. And what does all this have to do with DMT anyway? nothing!

You are just discrediting a creditable, promising forum. Sure were a minority, but jees we dont need to look more whaco than we already do to so called 'normal' people.

Surly there is 9/11 forum you can post this stuff on? How about the T.V. LOST series, that had some pretty cooky stuff. Seriously, paranoia is not the knowledge of knowing all the possibility's.

peace

again with this man ??