The Video ‘9/11 And Flight 175 Alarming Footage’ Shows How Lazy Some People Are

If there's one thing social media has shown me over the past 10 years, it's just how lazy some people are when it comes to checking sources of outlandish claims. How many times have you been on Facebook and seen that one of your friends has posted a link to a cancer miracle cure that the pharmaceutical industry does not want you to know about, maps of radiation leaks from Fukushima, or pictures of animal cruelty? I always look at these with a sceptical eye, and usually after just a few google searches, I discover their origin and look down on the people who posted them like the pompous, arrogant dick I am.  I have, however, recently been surprised by a video doing the rounds. A video that has such a basic mistake in it, I am surprised anyone would share it. The video was called '9/11 And Flight 175 Alarming Footage' and not only does it claim that 9/11 was an inside job, but has evidence that the footage of Flight 175 crashing into the south tower was faked.

The video says that the footage shot by Michael Hezarkhani is fake because of two reasons. The first is that "a real airplane could not have sliced through a building" but the narrator gives no evidence as to why they can't do this, so it can be dismissed. As they say - what can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

The second reason the narrator believes the footage was faked is because it shows Flight 175's left wing going behind a building that was behind the south tower. This would be impossible from the angle of the footage and the direction of Flight 175. The narrator says that this is a computer glitch and is irrefutable proof that 9/11 was an inside job, and that the video was fake. 

Let’s for a second ignore the thousands of people who physically witnessed the attack, the wreckage of the planes, survivors inside the World Trade Centre who saw the plane coming towards them, air traffic control, and all the thousands of other bits of evidence that prove beyond all doubt that a plane did crash into the complex. Let’s say that this video is the only piece of evidence that we have that shows the attack. Does it contain evidence that it was faked?……NO! and it’s embarrassingly easy to find out why. In-fact I was able to get to the bottom of this mystery using nothing more than my iPhone in under 1 minute.

Looking at the footage and knowing that Flight 175 hit the south tower flying north I figured that it was shot somewhere in Battery Park. Opening apple maps and turning on 3D I immediately found the buildings in the video. The white one at the front is called the Whitehall Building, and directly behind it is the Downtown Athletic Club. This is the building that this video claims is behind the World Trade Centre complex.


But let’s say that the person who made this video did not have a shiny iPhone… is there any other way he could have found where this building was? YES! by simply googling “lower Manhatten” and looking at any image after 1930 (date the Downtown Athletic Club was constructed). All these images clearly show the 159m classic Art Deco building over 0.3 miles south of the World Trade Centre complex site.

No one – and I mean no one – has any excuse for sharing this video with their friends, and they should be mocked for their lack of critical thinking and laziness.

About Myles Power (392 Articles)
My name is Myles Power, and I run the educational YouTube channel, powerm1985. I spend what little free time I have sharing my love of SCIENCE! through home experiments, visiting sites of scientific interest, and angrily ranting at pseudoscience proponents. I am also one of the founding members of the podcast 'The League of Nerds' - which I co-host with James from 'The History of Infection'.

9 Comments on The Video ‘9/11 And Flight 175 Alarming Footage’ Shows How Lazy Some People Are

  1. Let me throw you a bone. The video was called dissapearing wing to throw you off what the video clearly demonstrates. You brainacs out there should be able to calculate susupposed 500 multiplied by frame rate will give you said ft the plane traveled in that shot. Hundreds to clue you in. The planes size does not change! Look at the “plane” the angle implies at least some. Yet zero change in size fromperspective. The wings stay the same size throughout one should get bigger the other smaller. Second point look at the specific angle of said plane. Its not straight at all. When entering building it would have caused a fireball not directly horizontal to the empact. Cant have it both ways if you insist that it is straight coming in then the planes wings proportions should adjust accordingly. If it came in slanted then the damages should not have been direct opposite to impact. Next time dont read a title of a video and think so small. Use your brain it was a distraction to get you off the glaring truth of the video. If I have to explain that to you it means my people are winning.


  2. Funny how you don’t talk of the other footage, like the one where the plane flies right through the building UNDAMAGED.

    Think you can write a blog about the 3 videos showing the flight 77 into the pentagon?


  3. So you don’t believe everything you see on the Internet but have no problem believing everything you watch on TV or read from your controlled media? I think you should ask your doctor if zoloft is right for you.


  4. Hi Miles,
    With all due respect, you are living in a dream, in lala land that doesnt understand science. Of course the guy who talked about the 2 things regarding the video is 100000% right. If you go into any youtube video, and retrieve this particular shot, and then go frame by frame, you will see that the left wing cannot / and should not overlap the building, because the building on that angle is higher. Any person can slow motion the video and can see that its fake.

    Also Miles, do you know what an airplane is made of? Light aluminum. And its hollow too.
    How in the name of Jesus Christ can a hollow aluminum airplane can slice through 2.5 inches of re-enforced steel? Its scientifically impossible. The plane would of hit the building and slammed like a pankcake and fall down,

    And what debree where you talking about? You mean the engine that was placed in the street? The idiots that placed that engine, placed the wrong engine. The 767 does not use that type of engine.

    What witnesses saw the airplane? The ones that are apart of the conspiracy?
    Let me tell you that many have been involved. If the CIA would come and tell you, ” hey if you say anything about this, we’ll erase your profile from the system and take you out “, i can tell you, thst anyone would obey.

    Get your facts right and ask scientists, not the idiots of the msinstream media



    • Dorothy Mantooth // August 10, 2015 at 3:56 pm // Reply

      Yes, and hurricane winds/tornadoes have never forced vinyl records to impale telephone poles. Scientifically impossible, right? The record would just break and fall down.

      Oh, wait… Hurricane force winds and tornadoes have actually done that with records and all kinds of other light debris. 2x4s have gone through concrete. It happens all the time. Do you honestly not think velocity and force have anything to do with it? What “scientists” have you been speaking to who do not understand the basic laws of physics?

      And that’s aside from all the other nonsense in your comment.


    • Wow. You are unbelievable. Let me guess, you don’t believe man landed on the moon. Am I right or am I right?


    • The plane is about 300 yards behind the building. There’s literally no way to believe the wing should do anything other than what it does. The scale of the aircraft is consistent and correct as it moves through the frame.

      It’s a 100+ ton aircraft travelling at nearly 600mph – it’s not going to just *stop*. To stop the aircraft within 14 inches (the depth of the columns) would generate a force of over 9,500Gs — that’s 9,500 times gravity. So take the plane’s weight, multiply it by 9,500 and then tell me that the exterior columns of that building could resist that?

      There were only three 14″ columns across every 10 feet of building facade. The welded steel that made up the columns was between 1/4″ and 5/8″ thick in the area where the planes hit. There really wasn’t that much steel. And most of the hole was made up formed by entire modules of the columns being pushed into the building – the four bolts at the top of each column sheared.

      As for the debris – there are photos and videos showing thousands of pieces of debris around the towers before the collapse. Small pieces of aluminum, seat cushions, bit of luggage, human remains…

      There was nothing inconsistent about the engine, that’s just nonsense.

      There are 60 videos of Flight 175, and dozens of photographs. For the “no plane” idea to be real would require that all of them were manipulated and that not a single “real” image had come to light.

      What sort of idiots would plan a murderous and treasonous conspiracy that could be completely derailed by any of the literally millions of potential witnesses taking a photo or video at just the right moment?


  5. FeloniousPunk // November 2, 2014 at 2:38 am // Reply

    You are so full of Zionist horseshit. NIST canexplain the destruction of WTC7 but I imagine you can, asshole.


  6. It’s a thing of beauty to watch ordinary people let their own fear and hatred and bigotry lead them down the most childish paths.


1 2

3 Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. 11 settembre, la “nuova” bufala | My Blog
  2. 11 settembre, la “nuova” bufala |
  3. 11 settembre, la “nuova” bufala | TopNotizie

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 199 other followers