Did Large Airliners Really Hit the Buildings on 9/11?

I hate to say it but I no longer believe that commerical airlines hit the WTC towers... I did for a very long time, and then I learned about Dr. Judy Wood and her amazing research, and it raised enough questions in my mind to start re-examining my belief that planes did hit the towers. Now, I honestly think it was something other than a major airliner.

1. One reason that I question whether or not commercial airliners hit the towers is because:

Softer elements cannot cut through harder elements, thus...

...Aluminum CANNOT cut through steel, just like copper does not cut through diamond (FACT).

...but Steel CAN cut through Aluminum. (FACT).

In fact, BIRDS can even cut through Aluminum (see below).

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/d199793c23f5.jpg[/atsimg]

So, for those of you that have been assuming that aluminum can some how cut through steel, I now have a question for you:

If birds can cut through aluminum (as seen in the picture of the aluminum airplane that hit a bird), does that mean birds can cut through steel?

It is commonly known in chemistry that harder elements can cut through softer elements, but not the reverse. The "hardness" of a material is classified using Mohs Scale, which explains how 'harder' materials can scratch / cut 'softer' materials, but not the other way around. See here: chemistry.about.com... and here: www.jewelry-secrets.com...

This is why Diamond, one of the hardest materials of all, is used in the toughest situations, because it cuts through most everything since it is one of the hardest materials known.

Aluminum is much softer than Steel, therefore, Aluminum cannot cut through Steel, just like Copper cannot cut into Diamond.

I learned this in junior high school Chemistry, and it was a basic concept that was used over and over again throughout highschool and college chemistry courses.

There is one exception I know of, which is when water is highly focused and sprayed at high velocity to cut through metals. They often add abrasive elements to the water to assist with cutting. The water has to be focused into a very narrow beam though so that all of the pressure is applied to a very small area, and the water has to be accelerated to 900+ miles per hour. see here: science.howstuffworks.com...


2. Another reason is because many of the hijackers have been reported to be alive and well.

See here:

1. guardian.150m.com...

2. 911research.wtc7.net...


3. Another reason I believe commercial airliners did not hit the towers is because many videos have shown some type of light-targetting mechanism on the WTC buildings as the "plane" approached, which is characteristic of a large cruise missile of some kind. Here, see the light for yourself:

1. Laser Targeting UAV, Evidence of Military Technology on 9/11:


2. ABL Laser spotting and fly by wtc I jet impact:



And here is just one of several types of remote piloted cruise missiles which could have been used: www.globalsecurity.org...

I'm not saying I know what was used, I just see too much evidence contradicting the "airliner" story.

-Abe

In my honest opinion, I think that the criminals behind 9/11 are getting us to hate terrorists AND hate our government, by blaming the "hijackings" on terrorists and blaming 9/11 on our government. I think the reality of the situation is that the "terrorists" behind 9/11 are trying to blame everyone else so that they can get away with the 9/11 attacks and use 9/11 to bring about the police-state they desire within the USA.

-Abe

Missile pods, lasers, holograms, DEW, windowless tanker and other nonsensical theories have been proven many years ago to come from certain sources that have been known to spread disinformation to discredit 911 researchers and forums that house theories that go against the official story. Most of them came from the 'pod' people.

Most of these theories are based from really poor quality youtube videos and extremely poor quality images while ignoring the fact that 100,000's of people witnessed the planes strike in person.

The laser targeting video has been proven to be just debris floating.

Beyond my honest opinion these theories are meant to discredit forums such as this one by using disinformation tactics. Muddy the waters of truth so to speak in attempts to smear 911 'truthers' and make them look like tin foil hat moonbats but the truth is that no true 911 researcher ever bought into such nonsense.




[edit on 16-3-2010 by Shadow Herder]

[edit on 16-3-2010 by Shadow Herder]

Click here to learn more about this warning.

Here is a video of Dr judy wood who is in cahoots with TheWebFairy and Nico Haupt. Well known 911 truth "agent provocateurs".

Wq2rx

NOTE: These people are not truthers but people who are out to discredit 911 truth. There is some profanity so please use discretion.



[edit on 16-3-2010 by Shadow Herder]

Originally posted by PookztA

Way to be closed-minded.

-Abe

[edit on 16-3-2010 by PookztA]

I am far from calling you anything. I have studied and am well versed in these topics for many years now and before. I have met the people who 'started' these theories in person.

I guess we are entitled to believe in anything we want, this is your right but as far as the topics you brought up, I know much about it. So in the light of the forum and its purpose I believe I also have the right to share my years of knowledge on the matter and thats what I did. Nothing was directed at you at all but the at old camerplanet videos you posted.

Click here to learn more about this warning.

Originally posted by PookztA
, you definitely are disinfo. ..... just exposes who you truly are and what your true agenda is.

Good day,

-Abe

I respect your opinion, but calling me disinfo is sorta refreshing but if you knew me well and what I have done I am sure you would retract that statement. To each his own.

As far as an 'agenda'.... Truth will set us free and make us a stronger nation and peoples.


There is way more credible evidence to share or ponder over but in light of these forums, anything goes and should be discussed. I offered my opinion on top of yours. No need making it about me and believe me there is no hate in my heart.

Oh and.... Cheers

[edit on 16-3-2010 by Shadow Herder]

Maybe I wouldn't call you disinfo if you didnt jump to post hateful and false garbage about the ONLY person to ever file their evidence with NIST and Congress in a Qui-Tam whistleblower case, a case that made it ALL THE WAY TO THE SUPREME COURT! She has done more for bringing out 9/11 Truth than ANYONE. Has Richard Gage done this? Has Steven Jones done this? NO.

See for yourself:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/af839fca29db.jpg[/atsimg]


You say you "offered your opinion" but what you really did was post HATEFUL and FALSE information to try and DISCREDIT a legitimate 9/11 Researcher, one who is highly qualified to do this research because she has earned a Ph.D in MATERIALS SCIENCE & ENGINEERING.

You didn't simply disagree with Dr. Wood, you posted HATEFUL and FALSE information about her.

Don't try to act like a nice guy after posting hateful garbage, because now you just look like a hateful hypocrite.

I agree to disagree with you about Dr. Judy Wood. I support her 100%, and I am not afraid to hide it nor am I afraid to stand up for her.

-Abe

Abraham Hafiz Rodriguez
M1 Medical Student
B.S. Biology / Neurobiology


[edit on 16-3-2010 by PookztA]

Interesting thread that brings up questions. The main question is: If there are so many disinfo agents pretending to be against the official story only to cloud the issue by spouting off crazy theories then.....well where does that leave us and who "CAN" we trust? Where does it end? It becomes a never ending conspiracy with no end in sight. Very depressing actually. We already know we can't trust the government or Big corporations, but who really does stand up for truth? Who has a track record to prove it?

Just remember that all good lies and disinformation contains 90 % truth.

Webfairy, Nico, Letsroll911, Wq2rx, Killtown, Dylan avery, Jim Fetzer, all helped to create such far fetched theories that 911 truth has had a rough start out of the gate combating these far-fetched theories promoted by these groups.

Most of the Debunking 911 Myths topics are debunking those theories promoted by the above mentioned groups. The theories usually promoted are Pod on 175, Tv Fakery, Holograms, Air born lasers, Directed Energy Weapons, Windowless tankers, Space weapons, Laser/paper, Flight 93 shootdown, etc.... just off the top of my knowledgeable head.


Its no doubt many people equate 911 truth with tin foil hats or other insulting names. I dont like it, I have been called that and worse. I have too been mislead but with some training and diligence you will see through the ugly world of 911 truth and the cover up.

Johan Trusker,
Wealthy Entrepreneur
Driver of exotics
Married to model.

[edit on 16-3-2010 by Shadow Herder]

I believe 100% that the government was either behind 9/11 or let it happen...but to say that planes did not hit the WTC's is beyond ridiculous. I know two people that were there and witnessed it 1st hand, as well as I was watching live on TV when the 2nd plane hit. So I dont get where people come up with this stuff.

Let's see, the hardest substance in a bird is probable the bones, calcium. The bird obviously cuts through the aluminum. Your theory is based on the inability of softer materials cutting through harder ones yet your proof proves just the opposite can happen. Am I missing something??
If softer materials cannot damage harder ones, how do waves of water and gusts of winds damage buildings? Maybe there's more to it than just the hardness of the material, hmmm?

reply to post by PookztA


This is basically the same "evidence" with the same links as your other

2 or 3 threads on Judy, just a different title.

It's been de-bunked in all previous threads .

reply to post by Sean48



actually the links and pictures in my original post have never been posted by me in any other thread in this forum.

this is the first "no planes" post I have made, because I felt like I should share this information.

That's fine if you don't agree with my opinion, because I am simply sharing the information I have found. Agree with it or Disagree with it, I could careless as long as you are viewing it and then deciding for yourself.

As long as everyone is thinking for themselves and not just group-thinking like so many truth-seekers do, then I am happy.

I respectfully disagree, because I am no longer convinced that airliners hit the buildings.

-Abe

Originally posted by PookztA

Softer elements cannot cut through harder elements, thus...

It is commonly known in chemistry that harder elements can cut through softer elements, but not the reverse.
-Abe

Dont think so tim. Unless this little girls hand is 'harder' than cement

Also, a softer bullet can penetrate harder materials. Has to do with speed, inertia and a bunch of other scientific mumbo-jumbo it gets a little complicated.



[edit on 16-3-2010 by Shadow Herder]

[edit on 16-3-2010 by Shadow Herder]