tv-fakery

Exploding the Airliner Crash Myth (By Morgan Reynolds and Rick Rajter)

Excerpt below. Click here for full paper.
Exploding the Airliner Crash Myth
By Morgan Reynolds and Rick Rajter - October 27, 2006
I. Introduction
Newtonian laws of motion combined with physical evidence prove no Boeing airliners crashed on September 11, 2001 at any of the four designated sites. The government's story is a provable, gigantic lie although various possibilities remain open about what really happened.
From a narrow prosecutorial point of view, we already have enough evidence to prove guilt at the top. The 9/11 hoax was a stunning psychological operation (psy-op), the most audacious and murderous false-flag operation in history, well-planned, deceptive at every level, intended to manipulate public opinion, and wildly successful in the short run.

9/11 TV-Fakery... Hunt the Boeing (WTC) 2: Pythagoras Exposes Phantom Flight UA175 as a Hoax (Analysis by StillDiggin)

Thursday, October 26, 2006

9/11 TV-Fakery... Hunt the Boeing (WTC) 2: Pythagoras Exposes Phantom Flight UA175 as a Hoax

Introduction

It appears that the newer source of the "Jim Friedl" audio has more to offer than meets the ear. In this newly released video, we are presented with an uninterrupted “live” video feed, which provides us with a reverse version of the magic trick "Now you see it... Now you don't."

At 7:38 of this video, the feed is switched to a different helicopter. A few seconds later, FOX commentator Jim Ryan describes the image from the video feed as "the picture from our chopper now arriving at the scene." This comment seems to validate that this is indeed the same video that was broadcast “live” by WNYW FOX5 on 9/11/01, since the picture correlates with the commentary. In what I referred to in my previous article as the "original source," the video feed never switches to this helicopter (this would have occurred approximately 2:44 into that video).

Although this matching commentary does not necessarily prove that this newly released video is exactly what was broadcast “live” by WNYW FOX5 on 9/11/01, it does seem to prove that this is the feed that Jim Ryan was looking at as he was commentating
Continued here...

Did The Digital Plane Image Decelerate At WTC 2? (Paper by Rick Rajter)

Rick came to MIT as an undergraduat in Materials Science and Engineering. Rick graduated from MIT with a bachelors in 2003 and is now in the Ph.D program at MIT.

DID THE DIGITAL PLANE IMAGE DECELERATE AT WTC 2?
By Rick Rajter - October 26, 2006
One of the major oddities of all WTC2 videos is the apparent lack of plane deceleration from many of the observed camera angles. The plane seems to fly in effortlessly, but then comes to a complete stop while inside (apparently violating conservation of momentum and energy). To the layman, these two conservation laws mean we should expect TWO major sources of slowdown when one object penetrates another:
• Energy is lost via dissipation as the intruding object breaks and destroys the impacted area into smaller pieces
• Energy is transferred to the broken pieces in the form of kinetic energy or gained velocity.

A Challenge To All Who Believe Real Boeings Hit the WTC

A CHALLENGE
TO ANYONE BELIEVING THESE VIDEOS SHOW A
REAL PLANE HITTING THE SOUTH TOWER
I think this could benefit us all!
1. Go down to your local college/university.
2. Find a physics/engineering professor you can trust. (A real one, with a PhD)
3. Show him/her the slow-motion videos here (or better yet, show straight from the CNN DVD)
4. Ask the professor flat out: "Is that a real plane?"
5. Ask the professor to explain the answer scientifically, and list the laws of physics that would apply.
6. Post your results here.
7. Let others with the nohow evaluate it.
8. If any errors are found, make a second trip to the professor ask him/her to explain the errors.
9. Post your results here!
==============================
Former Mechanical Engineering Professor Dr Judy Wood and former Aerospace Engineer Joseph Keith both say the videos violate the laws of physics. If you don't trust them, then get someone who you do trust.
Getting answers from multiple professionals will help us all. Find people you can trust! They should follow the laws of science and nothing else. If they do, all responses should be identical. If you want, tell them that you'll post their answers on this website, but will keep them anonymous. (Perhaps you can post the name of the univerisity.)

Don't contribute to 911Blogger until dz bans the disinformation spam artists who are making a mockery out of all 911 research

"Fool's gold exists because there is real gold." -13th century Persian poet Rumi
I'm requesting that everyone consider not contributing to this website until the site owner, dz, makes an effort to ban people who are spamming it relentlessly with theories about no planes, TV fakery, space beams, etc..

It's my opinion that 911Blogger.com has become a safe haven for such individuals, who are IMO purposely trying to destroy the credibility of all 9/11 research by promoting these controversial theories -- theories that the overwhelming majority of 9/11 researchers believe to be divisive, deceptive, destructive, etc..

I'm not advocating banning someone for occasionally presenting these theories, or other controversial theories, but we all know that it hasn't been an occasional occurrence here at 911Blogger.com. Instead it seems to be an every minute of the day occurrence.

So, until dz takes the appropriate steps to get rid of the 911Blogger.com spammers, please contribute elsewhere.

I want to make it clear that I'm not speaking for anyone but myself. However, I do encourage those who agree with what I've written in this blog to not contribute to this website in any way until dz improves the situation. If he decides not to, I respect that -- however, I request my membership at 911blogger.com be terminated if he chooses not to.