No planes were used on 9/11

Pro says here: //'You are trying to prove that planes WERE used on 9/11 that had brought the world trade centers down. And so far, the only proof you have given me regarding this was that you had provided me several websites with quotes from so called eye-witnesses, that's it. '// The "eyewitness account" is one of the most reliable forms of proof/evidence there is, especially for an event with the magnitude of 9/11. To claim that the U. S. gov. paid off or created fictional people to be witnesses is highly improbable. With as many people that you're claiming to be involved in this plot it's very unlikely for it to be kept long as a secret. Pro goes on: //'Let me ask you something. Do you accept the possibility that those eye-witness account could have been made up, faked? '// No, because it would require hundreds of people to be involved in such a huge event which it would be impossible to keep it under wraps. And: //'Because think about it for a second, if criminals with the power of publicly influencing the world had really staged this event, would they not take the step further and simply create website(s) and make up some fake witness accounts and display them to the public? It is very easy to to that. '// //'And this happens to be the only explanation for those eye-witnesses, because I am pretty sure people cannot eye-witness something that never existed. '// Clearly in these two statements here, Pro is begging the question. A part of his conclusion can be found its premises. Again, my task in this debate is to negate the resolution: 'No planes were used on 9/11' I have done this by providing eyewitness accounts of real people, firefighters, EMT, and other members of the public. For Pro to arrive at the conclusion of "fake" without proper premises is fallacious. Here my opponent has a contradiction in his own argument: //'Do you accept the possibility that those eye-witness account could have been made up, faked? Because think about it for a second, if criminals with the power of publicly influencing the world had really staged this event, would they not take the step further and simply create website(s) and make up some fake witness accounts and display them to the public? It is very easy to to that. '// Pro claims these criminals (he's not even sure who they are) have 'the power of publicly influencing the world'. In the videos he provided the person talking says that the 3-D animation and editing was poorly done with obvious mistakes. It stands to reason that criminals with 'the power of publicly influencing the world' would have access to the best possible technology, and mistakes would be difficult to find. Pro's argument doesn't follow. He also says here: //'Realize, that aluminum plane melting into the steel tower is COMPLETELY against the laws of motion. These laws are not optional, your eye-witnesses have NOTHING on the laws of physics! An aluminum plane doesn't swim/melt into a strong and sturdy steel structure! '// It is possible that something travelling with the proper amount of velocity will penetrate and even pass through something of a harder density. The tornado effect: . http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov... Parts of the planes were found in the wreckage: . http://911research.wtc7.net... In closing Pro has not properly proven the resolution: 'No planes were used on 9/11' All Pro is doing is claiming that the basis of my counter argument is "fake". The b. o. p is on Pro since he is making the claim that no planes were used in the events of 9/11. My opponent has failed to do this. The videos that he presented offers no information as to who did the analysis and if they even have the proper credentials and experience to make such claims. Again, these events took place in a city with well over a million people. It stands to reason that if there really wasn't any planes there would be more witnesses claiming that there was none as oppose to ones that says there were. For anyone to make a claim that the U. S gov. or any other criminal organization planned and carried out and paid off and/or hired thousands of Americans to be a part of these events is extraordinary, and extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Back to Pro.