No planes were used on 9/11

Assalamualaykum Video 2: http://www.youtube.com... Video 3: http://www.youtube.com... Video 4: http://www.youtube.com... Thanks for the reply. I am going to go straight to the argument. 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. Let me ask you something. 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. 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. Those eye-witness accounts are not direct evidence supporting your view that planes were used. I can make a website right now, and make up fake quotes by random/fake personas and state that a meteor crashed somewhere in Texas, for example. Is that proof that a meteor really crashed into Texas? No, not at all. When I said proper proof is through visual representation, I was not kidding around, because this is exactly what I am providing you. You said this: "He claims that all of this is "undeniable proof". Where is the proof/evidence that the videos you have displayed was subject to editing and 3-D animation?" Haven't I spent the last 2 arguments providing the proof for you to investigate? Go over my previous arguments, you so far have not refuted anything whatsoever, but you keep bringing up your eye-witness accounts that have not proven me that planes were used. And if your question was aimed at attacking the uploader, thinking that he/she was deliberately trying to fool the viewers into thinking that the planes were animations, then the proof for that is pretty simple. The clips that the uploader has used are the SAME international and public clips displayed on YouTube and other sites that everybody already knows about and have seen countless times. You can verify these clips off any other video clips you find of the same clips. Whether on another YouTube channel, another website, or your very own recording at home! I have these at home as well, many families around America have videotaped the news on the morning of Sept. 11th, and the the clips that the news have aired, ALL of these clips have been distributed and collected and preserved around the world. You can verify this yourself. All the clips, the uploader is simply dissecting them, and providing the information to whoever views his/her video. They are properly explaining in easy understandable manner, HOW the planes are animations, and HOW the entire attacks were faked. I spent the last 2 arguments going over some of these clips with you, whether you have looked over them or not, you still have failed to prove me that planes WERE used. Your eye-witnesses have not proven anything. I have verifiable evidence, you do not, that is the difference. You can verify my evidence through any other source, it doesn't have to be this specific video. The video series that I have provided is just saving us the time, as they have collected the main clips and dissected them in order and have provided the evidence alongside it, proving to you how the planes were animations. I will continue on with my argument. --- Now, there is absolutely NO doubt, that there were MULTIPLE angles of the 'planes' crashing into the towers. You can simply compare two different angles, and see for yourself, how the clips disqualify each other. Bob is standing outside in the USA, and Joe is standing outside in Canada, and a supposed 'meteor' is approaching the North American continent. Bob decides to film the sky and shoot the comet, and Joe decides to do the same. The comet arrives, as the news says, and a news station in the USA displays Bob's video tape of the comet. A news station in Canada displays Joe's capture of the comet. Both, Bob and Joe, have filmed the comet at the same time. However, there is a contradiction. In Bob's clip, the comet is traveling east, and in Joe's clip, the comet is traveling north! Not only is the direction different, but the color of the comet is different as well in both clips. No live person on the streets saw this comet, except on the news. Then a website was later created, with a bunch of people's quotes, stating they saw the comet, and some minor details (where you can find some more contradictions). Now how is that logically possible? How can the comet be traveling EAST in one angle, but in another, be traveling NORTH? It isn't possible, and since nobody saw the comet anyway except supposedly on the news, it is obvious that it was a fake. The comet was an animation, and people later found out that these two news nations had a direct link with each other, trying to fool the world, but many refuse to believe because of their lack of knowledge, their ignorance. Believing in whatever the media says. THIS is exactly what happened on 9/11. I can simply prove this, by showing you two different angles of the 'same plane' that crashed into the tower. Go to that video I provided at the start of this argument. I titled it, video 2. Go to 10:25 in the video, and simply watch. In the video, you see two shots (clips) of two different angles. The first is called, "The Al-Quaeda Shot", and the second is called, "The Divebomber Shot." Just look at both of the clips and see how they disqualify each other. You can arrive to MANY questions from this...but let us ask these simple questions. 1) Why is the plane flying straight in angle 1, and descending in angle 2? Why are they flying differently in different ways? 2) If a person was supposedly EYE-WITNESSING this event, what would they be seeing with their eyes? The plane going straight, or the plane descending? 3) In broad daylight, the plane is pitch black, why is that so when the building right next to the plane is reflecting the sun's light, but the plane is not? --- Now take note at 12:10 in the video. This is where it talks about Newton's 3rd law of motion. Watch that 'Roadrunner Plane' shot. This is talking about crash physics. 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! Don't believe it? Then watch the beginning part of video 3 that I have provided above. All you have to do is press play. That is not tampered footage, all of that is physics. No words can deny physics, my friend. Whoever is reading over this debate, don't you agree, no matter what someone says, the laws of physics are the laws of physics. If a news reporter claims to have eye-witnesses of people claiming that the giant rock that was thrown into the ocean did not create a splash, they're lying. Because we all know, a giant rock WILL create a splash when landing FULL force into the ocean. --- Now, I ask the con to give me some real verifiable evidence, as well as to refute these undeniable proofs that I am providing. Because he has not convinced me that planes WERE used. Is it that hard? If planes WERE used, then simply prove it. If you think these planes actually existed, is it that hard to prove it in ALL ways, including visual representations? I can provide a news clip of a person claiming on the SCENE that he saw no planes, you want to see it? Click on vid 4 at the top and skip to 12:54. Here you have a REAL EYE WITNESS claiming that there was NO PLANE. And look at the reaction. Peace.