Inconclusive. Demonstrates nothing. Most of everything in there is based upon faulty assumptions or flawed analysis.
You cannot say one single thing that retorts anything in the video. As a typical operative, you will avoid all issues demonstrated in the video. You will never ever bring to the table, the contrasting opinion. You will leave it out completely, by saying things like just said. You are clearly delusional or intentionally misleading. You said absolutely nothing in your post to rebut anything stated in the video. You showed no evidence you even watched it at all.
So far, you fail.
Ok, here's an easy one.
The "multiple axis" argument is bullshit as clearly the cameras are on different axis and at different heights.
How about the one where it's like, "what happened to the backdrop?!" and "the plane is coming in parallel to the ground here, and it's divebombing here?" Yeah, no shit, cause one camera is clearly positioned above the tower (you can see the top of the roof) and the other is clearly positioned beneath the top of the tower. In one case, you will see the sky cause camera is pointed up, in the other case, you will see the ground cause camera is pointed down. This can also create the impression that in one case the plane is 'divebombing' and in the other it is not.
Here's another one. The nose of the plane going through and coming out the other side of the tower? A skyscraper is like a huge column of air. If you displace the air in that column quickly, it has to go somewhere. So, if plane flying 550 mph flies into the tower, compressed air will burst out the opposing side. By the way, this is why in other conspiracy videos when they argue that you can see "explosions" at the bottom of the WTC immediately preceding its collapse, the explosions are not really explosions at all. When the tower begins to collapse, all that compressed air gets pushed down and so all the windows get blown out at the bottom before it has even fallen. It's extremely plausible that the 'nose' you see coming out of the building is debris of a similar shape.
The audio analysis is equally bullshit. Do you have any idea how different the same sound can seem when it's recorded with different mics in different locations with different wind/environmental noises? Overwhelmingly loud sounds can also spike the limiter on your mic such that it clips and you won't hear anything at all. It's quite possible you could be recording with a particular type of mic and not hear any explosion. Also, if you have a drum kit, that 'reverse cymbal loop' sounds nothing like a cymbal at all. By the way, I own a drum kit, a recording program with a professional drum sampler, and various mics.
Just a few.
