Crash Physics

There were no crash physics evident at any of the three sites where planes are supposed to have struck AND PENETRATED buildings.
For the plane for instance to have penetrated the tower, you must assume that it remained intact going through the outerwall.
It is obvious to everyone that whatever, the planes did not smash to pieces and fall into the street.
I will deal with this first.
"For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction".
That means that the force recieved by both objects in a collision will be equal.
Now what determines how much force goes into the objects?Well, if one of the objects penetrates the other, the force needed to break through the penetrated object will be the amount of force recieved by EACH object.
If you add up the total sum of the forces required to "punch" through all of the beams we are told that the plane went through, then you would have to say that the plane sustained that amount of force and did not break up.
I contend that the plane would break up with much less force than what it would take to penetrate all those outerwall beams.
Then there is
If the plane were made of tungsten or something, and it remained intact, then upon the nose penetrating the first beams, whatever force that took would be transmitted from the beams to the nose of the plane also, causing decelleration and deflection.
The heavier part of the aircraft (the engines) has more momentum though, and due to the deflection of the nose, the plane would tumble, in the same way a rifle bullet tumbles through kevlar.
The tumble would occur in the direction of lift from the wings and tailplane.
The decelleration of the wing surfaces would not cause an instant loss of lift because the lift is due to low air pressure above the top surface of the wing, there would be enough lift left during an impact to determine the direction of tumble.
And the 2nd plane was depicted as banking to the left when it hit the tower, so it would have been rising to the left when it struck, giving us another, seperate reason for the plane to tumble.
Then there are the glaring anomalies.
People trying desperately to prove planes always show a picture of a wrecked CFM56 engine in a NY street, an engine that could never have been fitted to a 767.
And photographs of aircraft wheels, where the tyres have the wrong number of tread grooves to be from a 767.
Yes, it's a good question, WHERE DID THEY COME FROM?
And the engine at the Pentagon was a JT8D which is also wrong for the aircraft we were told hit the building.
I think it likley that these engines were used in ordnance that was custom-made for the job.
Then there is the cherry on the top of the planehugger sundae-
A photo of a truck that has had "AIRCRAFT PARTS" spray-painted on the back.
In fact, if they WERE collecting aircraft parts in that truck, why would they go and spray that on it?
Do you think they might have lost it otherwise?
None of the plane videos show a CRASH.
There were no planes that hit the towers.
There were planes flying there that people saw, but none that hit the towers.

And what about the fake eyewitness videos, mostly with the same pathetic voice actress who can't even change her act from one take to the next.
Who made those?
And why?
Check 3 of them out here:
When I see PHYSICS PROFESSORS and SEASONED, HIGH PROFILE RESEARCHERS ignore these most basic evidencial facts I seriously doubt their intentions.
Do you not think our truth movement would include WELL-PLACED psy-op agents?
They can make a plane invisible but they can't place a stooge?

Agreed. I dont dig airplanes

Agreed. I dont dig airplanes melting into buildings.

If you remove the outer layer of load bearing steel columns and those grill things, there are still floors every 12 feet apart.

Each floor was about 6 inches thick. The supposed "plane" hit at about a 45 degree angle, meaning the whole thing didnt span one or two floors, it spanned about 10 floors from wing tip to wing tip, if the "plane" was 155 feet long.

Each floor was an acre in size, each connected to the core, each with steel bracing left and right underneath., each must have weighed 5000 tons.

One yard sqare of concrete weighs 500 lbs, havent time to work it out maybe later.

Since we are allowed to express opinions here

I will express my opinion that this particular nexus of "researchers" are clearly damaging to the movement.

Further, it is my opinion that they are intentionally discrediting the movement.

This latest blog is a perfect example in that it is not based on any real empirical evidence. Any scientist worth his salt knows that simple observation of a video - and speculation - such as this - is irresponsible. Its just not science. That much is certain.

I do not take accusing people of being infiltrators lightly. I myself have been called an infiltrator. But, I base my conclusions on the following:

1 - These "researchers" seem to move from one absurdist theory - to the next - without providing any real WORK to substantiate their claims. While i could certainly believe and understand someone being misled - once - i cannot believe that these SAME people with their advanced educations can simply move from no-planes to mini-nukes - to star wars beams - to little green men - with such a cavelier approach, and disregard for empirically based research. It is a clear pattern.

2 - These "researchers" are also responsible for launching personal attacks against other legitimate members of this movement. While I COULD believe that Reynolds and Wood and Haupt are simply ill-informed or ignorant - i cannot reconcile this with the fact that they seem to repeatedly launch broadside attacks against other researchers. If they TRULY believed that 9/11 was an inside job - why would they set out to fracture the movement in this way?

3 - The sheer VOLUME of material & repetitive nature of their posts APPEARS (IMHO)to take on the APPEARANCE of an organized disruption campaign. This is my opinion.

4 - The "research" itself appears to have no substance. When you look closely at the claims being made - and the evidence it is based upon - you very quickly discover that there is really nothing there. You will find layer upon layer of content that appears to be all hat - and no cattle. Compare this to the research of Hoffman or Jones - who provide real attempts (whether you agree with them or not)at demonstrable research which includes math, physics, FACTS and EVIDENCE - that LEADS to conclusions. We see none of this demonstrated by the "researchers" in question.


1 - Ignoring them does not work. As long as the MSM represents these individuals as leaders of this movement, our efforts are diminished.
2 - Engaging them in debate does not work. This is the trap. They are baiting us - and we would be fools to take the bait.
3 - IMHO the only tact which will be effective is to publicly denounce and expose these researchers in the most vocal and definitive way possible.

Towards this end I have been in discussions with several of the most prominent members of this movement. Most agree that action must be taken to bring this movement the type of public relations it deserves. We can no longer afford to be misrepresented. A consolidated platform with very simple precepts must be adopted -with clear leaders and a clear agenda.

It is time to cast off the "conspiracy theory" label - and become what we really are - a solid constituency - 1/3rd of the population that is demanding accountability and transparency on the issue of 9/11.

CRASH PHYSICS is not aliens!

You have used disinfo.
Accusing people of talking about little green men. Who said there were any?
And moving from one subject to the next?
This post was about crash physics.
I do not have a lab.
I have explained the abstract physics principles that would make it impossible for a real plane (banking) to enter a building straight like an arrow.
If anyone can refute my explanation of the physics, then please do so, that is what this thread is for.
You accuse no-planers of repetitive posts when your very reply is a cut and paste of a previous post you made.
That is what you call repetition.
My blog was placed originally as an answer, but I realised that it should be it's own blog.
And what of people putting mini-nukes forward as an hypothesis?
Can YOU tell us how all the concrete turned to fine dust and the spire disintigrated?
But this blog was not about that at all was it?
I kept it neat and tidy, CRASH PHYSICS.
It is YOU that is trying to drag it out into a wider bunch of concepts that can be smeared as disinfo.
There were no plane crashes.
Only videos of planes entering buildings with no physics going on.
What's wrong?
Can't you talk physics?
Why don't you wait for someone "QUALIFIED IN PHYSICS" to put his or her points about my explanation of the physics, instead of confusing the issue with diversionary concepts that I have not raised here?!
You want to shoo everyone away from this issue.
If you are honest and true, you will embrace the discussion of crash physics, as if you are telling the truth, the physics MUST correlate your story.
But it seems you would rather send people away from this discussion.
The correct ways to comment on this blog are:
1. Agree with individual points about the laws of physics referred to in the article, and relate it to the incidence of a plane into a building.
2. Disagree with individual points about the laws of physics referred to in the article, and relate it to the incidence of a plane into a building.
3. Discuss any other physical laws that may have a bearing on what was said in the article.
I shouldn't have to explain all this to you.
We are not at Kintergarden.
"CRASH PHYSICS" does not describe a generalised blog!
Where are the physicists on this matter?!!

Personal Opinions

Personal Opinions are allowed here. NO one has banned or censored all of these TVFakery no-planes blogs.

Unfortunately, free speach works both ways.

Clearly these themes are consistently polling VERY LOW on 911Bloggers rating system.

Additionally, I am entitled to express my opinion.

My opinion is that there is no legitimacy to this research. My opinion is that it is garbage. I've looked at it. I've studied it. It is nonsense. That's my opinion.

That's what blogger is about. Open debate.

My opinion. No-planes, mini-nukes, energy beams, pods and "flying objects" is all disinformation.

I disagree with you John...

These no plane, tv fakery, space beam blogs are spam. It should be deleted and the persons posting it should be banned.

Well yes - SPAM

I agree its spam. But why? By who? it is clearly nonstop with all these created 'characters'. and they all seem to share the same fondness for the same adsurdust theories - like no-planes and nukes and pods and energy beams.

sorry - its just not believable as a natural phenomenon.

Yes - it is clearly spam.

but - i am more interested in the intentionality behind it.

You are trying to drive a witch-hunt

You want to identify all of the people who don't go along with a particular bunch of beliefs as being both outside of the search for the truth and some kind of enemy.
You would put all of the best people who are genuinely tring to get to the real truth about things into one basket and have them shut up.
I would say it is you that people should be wary of, shaping and manipulating the truth movement so that it will end up the way you want it to be.
You are not believable as a natural phenomenon.
Why would you not happily wait for the physicists to pull my presentation to bits so you could pour scorn?
No, you don't seem to me to add up right.

There's a new NO PLANES garbage spammer everyday

Collect 'em all!

And throw 'em in the fuckin' trash where they belong.



It's not all one person

You postulate created "characters." But that's because you don't want to admit many people see the logic.

Since your only argument is "Everyone thinks so" it really bothers you that there are a few people who can think for themselves. And are not swayed by the "don't think that , people will laugh."

"In matters of science, the authority of thousands is not worth the humble reasoning of one single person."
- Galileo Galilei

You're not really debating.

His points are true. You are the one repeating.

You are just stating there is "nothing to it."

But you don't supply any evidence of that.

You're right. It's just your "opinion," as you said.

DZ...This qualifies as spam, does it not?

Every other blog on this website is about no planes, tv fakery, space beams, little green men, etc.. WTF?!?!

A very small group of individuals are working hard at making a mockery of this website and you're allowing them to. Why?

You need to clean house my friend. It's way overdue.

This is not debate

Just as I thought.
I raised points regarding the laws of physics to show that an airliner could not have gone straight into either of the towers.
I put my points in a scientific manner.
Nobody who disagrees will engage in a discussion of the physics.
These are basic things.
If I am wrong it should be an easy matter for one of those academics among you to point out my errors.
But this does not happen, does it.
What happens is I find myself put into a catagory of people that some of you want desperately to remove from the debate.
You accuse me of being part of some orchestrated campaign to discredit the truth movement.
All I have done is to talk about the laws of physics and why they contradict one thing: the planes.
As I said I am waiting to see if the academics among you are in a position to point out my errors.
But instead I see a campaign to get me thrown off the blogsite before the crash physics is given any consideration.
I would not call that open debate.
I would call that "purging the dissenters".

They squeal like stuck pigs

whenever the discussion involves simple, easy to understand physics. Out they come, outraged and indignant. "Ban them", "this is spam" , "it's hurting the movement", "nobody will ever believe this" "please, dz, please, make it stop, it's hurting my brain". Thanks for a clear and accurate presentation of crash physics, Coffinman. And disregard the squeals. It's just the usual suspects.

John Albanese

I have a real problem with the only "eyewitness" to the planes being real who is willing to speak up and be seen also being the person who is trying to filter the outlooks or people that are to be accepted as "worth listening to" in this movement, and get everyone else out.
The word "manipulation" comes to mind.
The people who carried out 911 are masters of manipulation.
One of their most powerful weapons is the controlled media.
Exposing the absence of planes at WTC will expose the depth of media involvement.
Then the question of who owns the media will come up.
Their weapon will be exposed as a psy-op tool.
That is why the issue of the planes is so important.
Don't think that your "heroes" can't be psy-ops operatives!

TV-Fakery WILL expose the media for being involved in the attack

Exposing the absence of planes at WTC will expose the depth of media involvement.


Correct. This is why it is so important.


Impeach Bush? What will that do?  The global elite will simply get another skull and bonesman to play puppet.


Thanks Coffinman for the scientific writeup!!

I think all the "no plane"

I think all the "no plane" morons should go start thier own "no plane" websites and stop hijacking the legitimate sites like this one and see who has more credibility with the masses in 3 months.
Its obvious 99 percent of the truth movement knows the planes were real.
Little hint...if your work is legimate and believable, it would be noticed on your own website and hijacking other websites wouldnt be you only hope of making enough noise to get people to look at you...
Notice how popular Steven Jones, David Ray Griffin, Loose Change crew got?....when the work is good,
it sells itself.
This crap doesnt...

much thanks for your

much thanks for your rational and scientific writup! Now I know who the morons are! LOL!

"Coffinman seeks fame"?!

"if your work is legimate and believable, it would be noticed on your own website and hijacking other websites wouldnt be you only hope of making enough noise to get people to look at you"

Well most people discribe my YouTube channel as "massive".
My ghostplane clip is at around 1/3 million hits.
I constantly get feedback thanking me for putting relevant information together.I just came here to look at ONE POST, but I saw that you people are turning the debate into dogsh*t.

I would be unable to sleep if I did not make a comment after some of the crap I have read here.

Coffinman You're Correct - There Were No Planes

Fragile aluminum-skinned jets, especially the wings, cannot penetrate solid steel beams and concrete. If you believe they can, you are ignorant and live in a Roadrunner cartoon world. The jets were manipulated images created in a TV studio and broadcast to an angry and saddened public - hundreds of times a day along with Osama Bin Forgotten.

Without the slightest investigation & within only minutes of the first fake plane crash, the crime had been solved by a TV announcer & the Arab suspects announced, some of whom are still alive today.

Aluminum-skinned jets, especially fragile wings, cannot penetrate solid steel beams & concrete as if flying through a cloud.

Where are the eyewitnesses?

NOT a single person witnessed a plane impacting the towers, that is, not anyone who wasn't a paid shill. People saw the planes hit via manipulated TV imagery. With all the Hollywood SFX you've seen over the years & given the dirty tricks and murders by U.S., Israeli & British secret agencies, is it not possible that these bastards could produce fake videos & distribute them?

It would be more than difficult to ask any witnesses what they saw and heard on 911 - especially since anyone who REALLY saw what struck the towers are either dead, drugged, or under a Federal judge's gag order NOT to say anything.

If you drive a car through a brick house, the car, especially the outside rearview mirrors, will NOT create a perfect outlined hole in the bricks.

Yet 911 film footage shows the impossible; fragile aluminum-skinned wingtips cutting through hardened steel & concrete as if it were only a cloud.

Ellen Mariani is the widow of a man who supposedly lost his life on Flight 175. She looked for relatives of other victims of that flight & after five years of searching, she has found no one. Other supposed flight "victims" are not even listed in the Social Security death index.

There is also a blanket gag order on police & firemen in New York surrounding the events of 911. Now why would this be necessary? Answer: to maintain the crime's coverup. I tell you that the key to 911 research is NOT to rely upon the TV video evidence -- hell, they were in on it.

It's A Damned Hollywood Production!

The planes were a special effect added to create the impression a plane struck the towers; I suspect it was either a bunker buster or a depleted uranium tipped penetrator, especially with the white-hot and trailing black-oxide smoke streaming from the building to the right; this is the signature of a DU projectile.

The jet maybe looked real on TV, however, frame by frame examinations reveals the video's not a real plane, showing impossible physical characteristics & behavior. It passes through the wall like a ghost w/o making a hole & w/o breaking off any parts. The hole only appears well after the plane has entirely disappeared.

It is a fake. The plane is simply a movie.

Witness evidence for a large plane hitting the south tower is as elusive as for Leprechauns.

The entire world is laughing at foolish Americans who believe faked TV footage as fact & their government would never harm them. The Mossad is leading America to total destruction.

Images of planes hitting the towers were easily faked; ever been to a movie? Use your common sense; an aluminum jet wing cannot penetrate concrete & steel; the faster it collides, the faster it would DISINTEGRATE!

Do You Believe Cartoons Are Real?

The "plane" slips into the South Tower with zero resistance, no explosion, no destruction to the "jet" whatsoever. It's crap. The plane was added for effect to camouflage a missile impact & broadcast via the criminal controlled media to millions of saddened, unsuspecting people.

The brown explosive cloud shooting back out from the "plane's" supposed entrance is concrete being vaporized by an internal bomb explosion. Forward motion of the jet & fuel would continue forward, & jet fuel burns black.

As for the hole(s) in the towers broadcast on TV, there may be several explanations why they appeared as being made by a plane (with wings outstretched). If a guided missile was launched into the towers with the "jet planes" imagery on TV employed as a cover story, the matching holes could be easily manufactured by:

* shaped charges
* video manipulation

...or a combination of both. The perps involved aren't worried; after all, who can prove their crimes? They got rid of the evidence.

Some of the plane's denser & heavier parts like its engines & landing gear might penetrate the building, however, there would be a large amount of fuselage, wings & other wreckage falling to the street below. On 911 we didn't see this happen.

So-called "911 truth-seekers" think that proving OTHER aspects of the 911 crime are important, but exposing the fantasy of aluminum-skinned jet planes penetrating solid iron and concrete and the media being complicit in the crimes are NOT important.

Even Daffy Duck Knows There Were NO Planes

For those who still think the wings of an airliner can penetrate several feet of solid steel and concrete consider the following:

A duck flying into a jet's wing at 10 miles an hour (say on a runway) will bounce right off the wing, maybe hurting the duck, but not the airplane's wing.

The same duck hitting the jet's wing at high altitude speeds of 400+ mph can literally rip the jet's wing off, or at the very least causing it great damage.

Imagine what would happen to a jet's wing colliding with 5 inches of solid steel and 40 inches of concrete at 500+ miles per hour.

The wing would disintegrate; it would NOT slice through as if it were a cloud. Yet this is what "911 truth seekers" would have you believe. They base their research on the manipulated TV footage broadcast that day and the videos created from that single feed.

People who really want to know what happened on 911 would be better served waking up to the extent of control over TV broadcasts and STOP following certain "heroes" like Mike Berger and the other limited-hangout "leaders."


I don't pretend to know exactly what was fired at the towers, but I can say with reasonable certainty that it was NOT a large Boeing aircraft.

Perhaps a bunker buster, or DU tipped munitions were used and the manipulated airplane imagery superimposed as a disguise. FYI, contrary to a normal plane crash, there were no plane parts with identifying serial numbers found for ANY of the 911 so-called flights, not even the one in Pennsylvania, or at the Pentagon.

This is Bullshit

I came to this post thinking, as I still do, that the no planes theory was bullshit. However, since NO ONE has even attempted argue this with facts... I'm really fuckin' disappointed in the gang of thugs that call themselves a movement... one that i find affinity with no less.

This reminds me of oh so many threads I've taken part in on subjects like DU weapons being illegal, white phosporious being illegal, bush stealing elections... etc... You see I'm not a one issue activist. However, 911 is the reason I became "active".

To come here and see the same kind of personal attack "debating" that I see when I go to a Military recruiting forum and offer hard evidence of recruiters lieing to recruits. evidence of our current wars as being completly fraudulent.. etc to diswade as many poor kids lookin for a job from enlisting ... well, its .. disappointing.

Prove HIm Wrong Or Shut The Fuck Up.


Hey, if they could prove us

Hey, if they could prove us wrong, they would have done so. Fortunately tv-fakery has the Laws of Physics on its side. I'm looking forward to 911Blogger getting back to being a NEWS site with rational commentary without all the ad hominems

intelligent discourse

This is what intelligent discourse on this subject looks like.


Interesting. However...

Eyewitness testimony means nothing when compared to the laws of physics. Physical Laws (such as Newton's) show the videos to be a fake plane. Even if a million people claim they saw a real plane, if the testimony is contradicted by physical laws, the physics win every time. Maybe we should wait a few days to see if someone can refute any of the scientific reasonings given.


Also... just because the videos were faked, does not necessarily mean a 767 didn't hit the tower. 


So if you are saying it is a missile, which I still dont really believe, YET, who organized this, and why havent hundreds of people and their bandwagoners jumped onto FOX NEWS to tell their story of seeing a missile, not a plane? And how would this benefit the US? Get Bush into a war? That doesnt do anything for him except cause his ratings to go down...

Excellent Questions.

the media (FOX, CNN, NY Times, etc) are in on it for sure. They're the ones who broadcast the fake images. See here for other ways to prove their involvement. They'll do everything in their power to continue the coverup.

The entire NY Fire Dept is on a gag order to not discuss explosions/bombs/etc in the World Trade Center.


Bush doesn't seem to care about ratings, as long as they're high enough for him to stay in power.