Quit making shit up to cover your previous failures.
There is only one piece of tape from the Pentagon crash and it was recorded by the camera on the gate. Unfortunately it has a 1 second refresh rate so the quality is very poor.
It wasnt’ crashing into and through a building at 500mph either.
Impacts like that make a tremendous noise with or without explosives. Mass X Veocity Squared = Energy on Impact.
The impacts of those planes was equivalent in energy to most of our largest conventional explosives.
Another steaming pile of completely fabricated BS not supported by any verifiable fact.
I know what you gonna say:
F4 Phantom is made of tin can while passenger jets are not.
1 Like
The F4 is being crashed into eight feet of solid steel reinforced concrete bunker material.
The F4 is also less than half the mass of the 737’s that crashed into the pentagon.
Further the bunker wall it’s being crashed into is designed to absorb the energy of impact by moving exactly as it says is the stupid video.
You and Magog have already tried this one and gotten laughed off for the effort.
I’m not the only one laughing
Then you’re too stupid to realize you’re just making a complete fool of yourself again.
MCDONNELL DOUGLAS F-4 PHANTOM SPECIFICATIONS
Wingspan: 38 ft. 4-7/8 in.
Length: 63 ft.
Height: 16 ft. 6 in.
Empty Weight: 29,535 lbs
Gross Weight: 61,651 lbs
Top Speed: 1,485 mph
Service Ceiling: 62,650 ft.
Range: 1,885 miles
Engine/Thrust: Two General Electric J79s/17,900 lbs each
Crew: 2
Armament: One M61A1 20-mm cannon; various combinations of AIM-7 Sparrow and AIM-9 Sidewinder missiles
Ordnance: Up to 12,980 lbs of ordnance on four wing pylons
The 737’s used that day are over twice the size and 3x the weight of the F4 used in the video and the wall being crashed into in the video is specifically armored to contain a nuclear meltdown and possible explosion.
Size and weight don’t matter.
They cannot go through a concrete building with steel girders.
Even a little bird can do this damage.
1 Like
Which has already been demonstrated to be a lie.
That nose cone is thin plastic because that’s where the avionics package is and no “little bird” did that damage.
You’re just making a fool of yourself and lying again.
The WTC’s were not “concrete buildings” the only concrete of any note in them was the floors and foundations.
The exterior was completely cladded in glass and aluminum, not steel reinforced concrete.
It was a bomb. Pre-planted
Yet another ridiculous claim you cannot support with any verifiable fact.
Why do you keep lying?
Documented by tens of thousands of eyewitnesses and on camera.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h3shmfKOZ9g
Virtually every camera in NYC that could be trained on the buildings was trained on the towers when the second plane hit.
One would have to be utterly delusional and or insane to buy any of the BS you two are selling on this subject.
Once again, fully explained and completely based on the best science available.
No footage of actual “hitting” of the building by plane?
Oh yeah, there were explosions, but they were bomb explosions, not planes.
The first video above shows exactly that, the plane coming over and hitting the North tower at approximately 1:08. It isn’t even questionable.
Same footage here, first four seconds of the clip.
At 50 seconds into this video you clearly see the plane impacting the 2nd tower.
No we saw something hitting the tower but was it a plane or a drone or just CGI
CGI was nowhere near that advanced in 2001 and if you can’t see the scale relative to the buildings and planes you are hopeless.
1 Like
There is a SOUND of a plane but not footage.
The sound is too faint for a low-flying passenger plane.
Whatever in the video is too small to be a passenger plane.
Bullshit, the plane is plainly visible.
The white object is way too small.
1 Like