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

[PookztA]

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).



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: http://chemistry.about.com/od/geochemistry/a/mohsscale.htm and here: http://www.jewelry-secrets.com/Other/Wh ... Scale.html

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 are a few exceptions I know of, one 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: http://science.howstuffworks.com/question553.htm

Another exception is when a lead bullet pierces through harder metals, but as with the water exception, this is because the lead bullet exerts its pressure on a very small surface area, striking at a very extreme velocity.


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

See here:

1. http://guardian.150m.com/september-eleven/hijackers-alive.htm  

2. http://911research.wtc7.net/disinfo/deceptions/identities.html

 
3. Another reason I believe commercial airliners did not hit the towers is because many videos have shown some type of infrared 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:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dr4BJ89Df5Q

2. ABL Laser spotting and fly by wtc I jet impact:  
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h9z15bgkoy4


And here is just one of several types of remote piloted cruise missiles which could have been used: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/agm-86c.htm


4. And here is another reason, relating to video footage that has not really been closely examined by the mainstream media:

Chopper 5 & the Missing Shadow: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYQHD69ojGY


5. Another reason I question whether or not large airliners hit the WTC buildings is because many witnesses and many reporters did not seem to think it was a plane.

On-Site 9/11 News Reporter Gives Eye Witness Testimony:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jrwF0Dx_FuU


6. And here is yet another reason I have been questioning the official airliner story, after seeing how easy it is to create a fake airliner impact using computer technology:

9/11 Ghost Plane Theory - Digital Computer Recreation of WTC Plane Impact: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IWZyXRuz1Uk

 
I'm not saying I know exactly what happened, I just see too much evidence contradicting the "airliner" story to accept it without a doubt.

It seems 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.

Please let me know your thoughts,


-Abe

[satya]

Who cares.  Israel did 9/11.

[Wimpy]

Pookzta,

Now you're really starting to behave like a moron.  You've posted this before and it was relegated into the 'nonsense' forum viewtopic.php?f=56&t=10512.

Are you looking for attention or having a tantrum?

[WATCHER.1]

Go to 911Studies.com/911 photos and look at all Jack Whites pictures and read his comments and see what you think then. Hint, he has pictures of WT6, the U.S. Customs House, being blown up when the second plane hit the south tower. Most people dont even know WT6 was the first building destroyed of four. Also has pictures of the first two fire engines on scene at the Pentagon that the Firemen took, showing two small fires that they extinguished, one in a dumpster full of rubber or oil that made all the smoke and another in a nissan parked about 40 ft from the hole. They showed up unexpected and reported fire out, no plane, no plane parts, no victims. They went back to National Airport where they were heading originally never to be acknowledged again. They threw showtime off a little but their engines showed up in dozens of official DOD photos that were taken all day long even though they were not there. Look at the pictures.