911 CrashPhysics. Steel vs Planes. Deceived again

911 CrashPhysics. Steel vs Planes. Deceived again


No Crash.

Watch as ENTIRE airplane- Wing, wing tip, tail section SLICES thru STEEL! It completely enters the structure w/o a reaction.

You would never believe using your good common sense and simple physics. But because you “saw it” on tv & were told what you saw.

“It must be true”.

“Ghost Plane”
From the INSTANT of a real plane hitting the 4 inch steel of the tower, the plane’s nose would be GONE & a shockwave would have

traveled down the plane at 5000 mph and would have deformed the back of the plane almost instantaneously or caused it to break off.


So the plane also shows zero interaction physics or zero crash physics.

Saturday, July 18, 2009
Zero Interaction Physics or Zero Crash Physics
by The Anonymous Physicist

In looking over some of the CGI videos of the second tower hit, I realized that perhaps no one before has summarized some matters

of what is and isn’t on these CGI videos. And that this summary is also a good, accurate catch phrase for the 9/11 truth community.

Now many have stated that the videos of the “second hit” show impossible crash physics. In a sense this is very true.

But that summary may beg the issue. After all what do we have on these CGI videos? I suggest we focus now on the tower.


In the first few “plane entering tower” frames of the videos, what some have called “melding” occurs.

That is the front part of the plane appears to DISAPPEAR into the tower–without ANY interaction of the tower. Very importantly,

I could state this better WITHOUT THE WORD “INTO,” as I assert this CGI video just has the plane image sequentially disappear,

and not “into” anything! Now one video, the Spiegel [German TV] video


has a close-up view from the side. It purports to show a flash at the surface of the tower just before the plane “enters.”

This led to the hangout/distraction of pods and missiles fired. Then the Hezarkhani video


of the frontal view shows–in the first frames–the “melding” or disappearing of the front of the plane,

along with first a white puff or two, and later frames have gray puffs.

But the curious thing is two-fold.

1. First all these puffs appear to be at the surface of the tower.

2. Nothing is shown to happen to the tower, at least while the front half of the plane is “entering.”

Thus all these puffs appear to be painted onto the tower’s surface.

This includes the alleged “missile fired from pod” bright orange puffball (seen from the side),

and the white and then gray puffballs seen from the front. All the puffballs do not have any accompanying tower damage at all.

No tower damage can be seen until much later in these GCI videos.

They contain zero interaction physics or zero crash physics.

Both the above side and front videos merely have puffballs painted on to the surface of the

tower–until after about half the plane or more has “entered.”

The side view has only the initial orange puffball. It’s either pretending to be a pre-entry puffball, or the initial contact moment.

Then there are no other puffballs until much of the plane has “entered.” And no interaction physics as well.

Now the tower CANNOT have waited to display interaction physics– pieces breaking off, or bending,

some going inward some possibly even breaking off and falling out and such– or crash physics.

In the real world, it would be there from the instant the tip of the nosecone hit the tower. A

nd puffballs painted onto the surface of the tower do not constitute interaction physics.

I have also written that from the moment of a real plane hitting the 4 inch steel of the tower,

a shockwave would have traveled down the plane at 5000 mph and would have deformed the back of the plane almost

instantaneously or caused it to break off.


So the plane also shows zero interaction physics or zero crash physics.

So no attempt to show the interaction of the plane and tower was employed in the CGI software used to create the second hit “videos.”

Simplistic puffballs were painted on to the SURFACE of the tower.

And at least for the first half of the “second plane” disappearing into the tower,

there is zero interaction physics or zero crash physics, not merely impossible crash physics.

Now a method used in the analysis of the Zapruder film of the Kennedy Assassination might be useful here. Except of course,

it may not be needed, or work here. Why? Because the Zapruder film versions that we are allowed to see,

at least had their origin in a real film, whereas the WTC/9/11 “second hit videos” appear to be entirely CGI.

Now all real JFK researchers know that the Zapruder film versions that we are allowed to see have been massively doctored.

There are many missing frames, and altered frames, and a moving background is added in, when the limousine was brought to a halt,

and much else. I have seen some 15 versions or more–none of which is accurate based on eyewitness testimony.

But some Z-frames are relevant here.

Frame 313 http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z313.jpg

is the fatal head shot frame; and you can even see the end of the gun of the shooter/driver, SS [Secret Service] agent, William Greer,

as the it goes past the curvature of the head of S.S. agent Kellerman.

The side flap, the back of the head, and the spray coming off the head of Kennedy have been analyzed, and are predominantly bogus.

Here are frames 321 http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z321.jpg , and 335

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z335.jpg to make this clear.

Now the side flap is known to be painted in because of both analysis and the eyewitness accounts from the Parkland Hospital doctors

and Bethesda autopsy viewers.

But my main point here is that some of these frames show an intact back of Kennedy’s head when numerous witnesses,

again at Parkland and Bethesda, have stated that a good portion of the back of his skull was missing.

And dot density analysis was used to verify this.

That is, Kennedy’s brown hair was found, in these painted in frames, to be far more black than anything else in the frames that really was black.

The black dot density [black dots per square millimeter] of JFK’s back of head far superseded anything in the frames that really was black.

Some type of similar analysis of the various puffballs could be attempted by the experts in this regard. Of course,

this discussion indicates it isn’t even necessary as there is zero interaction physics or zero crash physics of the tower and the plane for at

least the first half of the plane “entering” the tower. And we are apparently dealing with total CGI here.

Adding on puffballs of differing colors to the SURFACE of the tower does not afford interaction physics or crash physics at all!

That is the tower remains PRISTINE for far too long a time.

While some could analyze all these painted on surface puffballs, the terms zero interaction physics or zero crash physics should be

employed by actual 9/11 truthers, as it may be stronger, more relevant and more understandable than saying impossible crash physics.

And it should also be proclaimed that the tower on these fake CGI videos remains PRISTINE for far too long a time to remind people we are

dealing with the same monsters that should have been eradicated when they killed President Kennedy, and invented the pristine bullet.

It too claimed to be pristine and show no interaction despite the claim that it hit some five bones in two people.
And BTW, for those who still doubt that no planes hit the towers on 9/11, consider the following.

You can be sure that the perpetrators– the Regime’s military and intel agencies– took many videos of what they were doing (for various reasons).

Likely they took videos from their helicopters and planes flying nearby or overhead, from satellites, and from intel assets in nearby buildings,

and on the ground. If ANY of them showed real planes, and real interaction physics, they would have released these by now.

This, together with how numerous people have done fine work for over five years now documenting that all the released videos are bogus CGI, cements the case.

I should include that I have no doubt that the regime could have put better CGI on TV. See for example, the 1997 movie “Contact.”

When the first huge worm-hole device is destroyed, one piece of it is exploded, and falls onto the rest of it.

There is much INSTANTANEOUS interaction physics simulated, and it looks pretty real– even though the structure is quite elaborate, and entirely CGI.

Now the regime, some four years later, and with likely vastly superior CGI capability at its intel agencies, could have put plane hit videos, on TV,

that contained some, or much, interaction physics, but chose not to.

This has traditionally been the case with their most dastardly deeds. With the Kennedy Assassination,

the Pearl Harbor set-up, Gulf of Tonkin non-incident, the Apollo Hoax, and other events, either at the time they happened, or some time thereafter,

everything the Gov’t says is a lie, and often a physical impossibility– and this is clear to the intelligentsia. Those who can think and change can see this.

But most people cannot easily think and change; and that difficulty is created and enforced by the Govt, the media, education, religion, etc.

I saw Spooked recently put up an acronym for this– MITOP: Made It Transparent On Purpose.

It agrees with what I have written. From the beginning, I have cited everything from the jet’s wings blinking in and out of existence, to the words of videographer,

Evan Fairbanks, when he got his video from the FBI and saw that the jet/tower interaction looked like “bad special effects,

” to Larry Silverstein’s “pull it” WTC7 quote, that the PTB were telling the intelligentsia that the regime itself were the perpetrators. MITOP is meant to instill fear,

helplessness, depression, schizoid behavior, and ultimately paralysis in those who can think and change, so as to try to stop them from ACTING on what they have realized.

The way to counter this is to ACT.

For now please consider using these new terms for what is claimed during the planes first half “entry”/disappearance:

Zero Interaction Physics or

Zero Crash Physics

Pristine Tower


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s