Welcome to 9/11 Crash Test, a Project for Peace.
How to Win the War on Terror
This site is dedicated to the victims of 9/11 and the ensuing wars and occupations past, present and future.
2019 marks the 18th anniversary of the Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001, when all the world’s media played video of United Airlines flight 175 slicing through the steel columns of the South Tower of the World Trade Center as if they weren’t even there, thereby defying the laws of physics.
What we saw on television was impossible in the real world. A relatively lightweight, mostly hollow aluminum jet cannot slice through a steel building like a hot knife through butter, and this can be proved with a simple laboratory test.
According to the NIST, it was the fuel in the wing that gave it enough mass to penetrate the steel columns:
The NIST sure didn’t calculate the mass of the whole jet, nor of the whole building when they created their model, so it should be no sweat to verify whether or not they were talking out their backsides.
If the Plane Huggers in the truth movement really believe that it is the No Planers that are to blame for why truthers can’t be taken seriously by the mainstream, then they should be falling all over themselves to support the 9/11 Crash Test project. But they don’t do that. They would prefer we talk about the collapses, or molten metal, or how concrete turned to dust; anything but a discussion of what cut the holes in the towers.
9/11 Crash Test can end the impasse, and the inertia, of the 9/11 Truth Movement by proving once and for all whether or not what we were shown on television is possible.
If the wing slices the steel, then all the no planers can go home, but if the steel slices the wing, then all the soldiers can come home. It is a win-win for everyone.
The popular Television show “MythBusters” and their spinoff “MythBusters, Myth Revolution” have conducted just these sorts of tests at the rocket-sled test facility at the New Mexico Tech Energetic Materials Research and Testing Center; below are some links to some examples:
911CrashTest.org is intent on setting the historical record straight using reality-based logic and real-world science. We all saw the 9/11 videos; we all know flight 175 flew right inside the South Tower all the way down to the tips of the wings and the tail. Impossible you say? Yeah, so do I, but as a review, or for those who were too young at the time, here are Evan Fairbanks and Peter Jennings:
“Completely in one side, and out the other” – Peter Jennings
“It disappears like a bad special effect” – Evan Fairbanks
CNN broadcast this shot, once again the wings slice right into the building:
In this video, “How to make a ghost plane” the original 175 impact footage is used to speculate as to how the video effect was done.
Here is Purdue University’s allegedly scientific take on it:
And finally, the National Institute of Standards and Technology insists the plane wings did indeed slice the steel:
This is what’s known as the “Official Story”. It’s a bunch of hooey and 9/11 Crash Test can prove it. Please watch the below videos:
Tired of War Without End: 9/11 Crash Test released this video in August 2012. It has been 7 years since then, but nothing has changed with the 9/11 Truth Movement.
St. Nicholas and the Amazing Flying Wall Panel. In this video I discuss one of the more ridiculous chapters of the official story:
Update from 2016. Deleted by YouTube for “hate speech,” so it was moved to Vimeo. Same story, different year:
Sofia Smallstorm interviewed me about the project here:
And the latest update, in support of my friends in France:
9/11 Crash Test proposes conducting a scientific experiment in the spirit of “MythBusters” to resolve once and for all the question of whether or not a mostly hollow aluminum jet wing can slice steel as shown on television on 9/11. Using a rocket-sled and a real wing from a 767 the 9/11 Truth Movement can break into the mainstream by demonstrating what actually happens when a 767 wing collides with a steel building. The first step in conducting this test is to produce a Finite Element Analysis (FEA) to predict what we expect will occur when the wing collides with the box columns. In the name of peace, we are requesting the assistance of engineers the world over to help us produce an accurate 3D model of a Boeing 767 wing.
Sincerely,
Steve De’ak,
concerned grandfather
28 Comments
Ralph · July 15, 2020 at 10:28 am
Hi
Could you update on how much money is needed for this test now. How much money have you received?
I do think that the plane should have broke up as soon as it hit the building. Maybe you can put something on go fund me as well. I am very tired of the wars. I think if they end there will be another incident to get us into another one.
Steve De'ak · August 2, 2020 at 9:59 pm
Hi Ralph,
Thank you for reaching out.
Nowadays I think we could pull off the test for about 175 thousand US dollars, considering purchasing a plane wing, renting a rocket sled facility, and all the other expenses that would accompany such an endeavor.
I’m sorry to say I was only able to raise around $250 on a crowdfunding site. All donations were returned (except for $50 from my sister, for which I still owe her dinner). I am a terrible business man and even worse fundraiser. I could sure use the help of someone who knows what they’re doing.
As far as the wars go, I think a project like 9/11 Crash Test could have gone a long way toward stopping them, but that was before this Covid madness set in. I fear no one even remembers 9/11.
Steve
Ace · April 19, 2021 at 1:02 pm
Hello Sir:
I know that you are going to find it really hard to believe this – however, I just discovered your website today. My – you have taken a lot of bashing for speaking the truth, even with ample evidence to prove it. Those who have attacked you are the arrogant complicit ones. People who have something more to loose than their pride in supporting your findings as truth.
When Sept. 11/01 happened, I was 35 years old and living in Alberta, Canada. It was the day that traumatized the world. I will never forget exactly where I was when it happened. How much worse it must have been for the people of New York specifically, and also the rest of the nation.
For years, life just went on for me. Until in 2013, I discovered a video about the towers being hollow. It made perfect sense to me, because from all the footage I had seen there just wasn’t enough rubble at the base of where those building collapsed.
Within that same article was a man who decided to cross reference the names of those recorded to have died in America on 911. Of all the names reported only about 250 were in that data base, the rest were fictitious. I did the cross reference and was shocked to see that it was true. Interesting, number – 3,300 – for the death total resulting from 9-11. My God, the damage that has resulted from one of the biggest lies of that decade, multiple crimes against humanity have spawned from it.
Hard to believe that Covid 19 is now the biggest lie ever perpetrated on mankind on a global scale.
You are a good honorable man to have stood on this truth for so long. Thank you! You are a rarity. Hope that all is well with you…
Steve De'ak · July 24, 2021 at 4:21 pm
HI Ace,
I’m sorry for the delay in responding. Thank you for your kind words.
I hope to have more new material to share in the next couple of months.
All the best,
Steve De’ak
H.B. Iyp · June 15, 2022 at 5:21 pm
Oh, Steve! We do! I promise you that we do. I’m just afraid that people born around 1996 and after know little to nothing about it. I’ve thought of trying to tell my now-teenage nephews about 9/11, but what to I say? I’d like to interrupt your innocent life with a terrible story about death, grief, trauma and war? I honestly can’t imagine how to start that little chat. Thank you for continuing to shine light into dark corners.
Matthew Oliverio · August 1, 2020 at 6:27 pm
Great site. Thanks for using real objective science to look at this closely. 911 is such a Voldermort of todays society no one wants to talk about it but this test could be a “fun” way to get peoples attention. We need to find some rich Mythbuster type people and build this! I can try to help crowdfund
Steve De'ak · August 2, 2020 at 10:03 pm
Hi Matthew,
Thank you! I’ll take all the help I can get.
If you know any bored millionaires please send them my way. 🙂
Steve
Nigel · March 2, 2025 at 8:46 pm
youtu.be/vD828p9Nt0U?si=ROGypY3hdsivaLOM
A single wing test would never definitively prove anything to the skeptics or opposition. A single wing would not scientifically replicate the event. If it would, then you could simply scientifically scale the model down.
Boeing uses s ale models for scientific testing.
You could build one tiny wing. One tiny wall. Scale the speed to match. And test it without half a million dollars.
You could source one of these models. You could have a model fabricated to the best of your financial ability and run it into a little wall.
To be honest. It would be a fantastic start. Imagine if you had a extreme accurate miniture made. Tested it and the results did not match in any fashion.
That would open enough questions to run a second experiment. It would prove possibility, so that an investor would participate in a second larger model.
Then you could source a third test.
If someone wants to run a scientific experiment. You never run only one test of an experiment. It’s not how science works.
Please do not respond with a dismissive deflecting answer. This is a completely sound suggestion and completely sound critique of the proposed experiment that did not take place.
If a single wing is enough to prove it. Then so is a scale model. Even Boeing uses scale models for critical testing.
Of you just ran a half way similar scale model into a half way similar scale model at an exact scale speed. You would be able to prove what you are setting out to prove.
https://youtu.be/9MFWnHkG6YU?si=RxwNzZY5BPPOlpuE
https://youtu.be/P-NWR3o8cgg?si=dQb_Bt_BHpHYDG_L
https://youtu.be/CLxp-lOjLHk?si=i8-iGemqts0n8oeW
Steve De'ak · March 4, 2025 at 10:44 am
Nah. The real thing or nothing. It would have been an irresistible attention grabber for even the mainstream media, not to mention it would have prompted millions of people to question what they saw on television.
Nigel · May 18, 2025 at 3:01 am
I love that we used to argue and now we are friends.
Edit. Well.. we still argue. But we are friends.
Steve De'ak · May 18, 2025 at 11:22 am
Oh, we’ll still argue. But yes, I’m happy to count you as a friend.
Not a Truther · March 7, 2025 at 1:13 pm
This is perhaps the most unscientific way of approaching this whole 9/11 thing I could possibly imagine. For one thing, your method would require you to purchase an actual wing from the correct aircraft, somehow get the same exact amount of fuel into it, find a surviving piece of the tower’s façade (which won’t happen), get some part of the core structure of the tower (also won’t happen) and then actually build everything in the exact same environment with the exact same conditions as when this event happened.
But that’s not all, you’d have to do this at least 5 times to produce actual scientific results.
Why not just run a computer simulation? And why does it matter? The whole thing was obviously in at least some part organized by the government. You really expect us to believe building 7 just casually had demolition charges visibly go off and cause the building to collapse yet somehow that wasn’t planned or controlled when you could literally see the charges in the building? Total horseradish.
This whole thing is remarkably stupid. You really just cannot accept that sometimes the government does bad things for bad reasons just to make money. Our country made hella money off the GWOT, especially after 9/11. We just needed to come up with a reason to invade the middle east and kill half their population.
Steve De'ak · March 7, 2025 at 5:01 pm
Well, considering two planes at different speeds impacted at different angles of attack, but produced very similar results, I’d say you’re wrong.
No. Not remotely. Engineers can produce finite element analyses to predict the most likely outcome. But if it takes five tries to remove all doubt, fine. Let’s do it. It would be much less expensive and kill fewer people than a never-ending war. Any problem with that? It would even have cost less than the money the “9/11 Truth Movement” collected from its followers.
You mean, like Purdue University did? Are you serious? The whole idea of 9/11 Crash Test was to shock the viewer into thinking for themselves. Have you watched any of the videos, or read any of the articles on this site?
I see what’s happening here. An acolyte from “Architects for 9/11 Truth” wandered off the plantation.
You haven’t read anything on this site at all, have you?
But now that you’re here you’re going to have to think critically, something Richard Gage never does in pubic. Let’s say I agree with you. WTC7 was obviously a controlled demolition. Now what? What does that prove?
Well, for one, there is no way an office building that was still operating as an office building could possibly be prepared for controlled demolition without the tenants being aware of it. That’s the one thing Gage and his drooling sycophants don’t consider. So, you tell me, what does WTC7, as depicted by AE911T, prove? AE911T never says it proves anything! They only focus on WTC7 because it wasn’t hit by a jet. All AE911T and the rest of the “fill in the blank” for 911 truth demand is that someone, somewhere, starts a new investigation. Even after 24 years, their story never changes. Well, I gotta say, petitioning the most likely suspects to investigate themselves seems like a colossal waste of time, but that’s just me.
Please spend some time reading some posts and watching a few videos. I think you’ll find we’re on the same side.
Steve
Bourgeois · April 6, 2025 at 8:20 am
Que diriez vous de la preuve du crash d’un avion sur une tour du WTC ?
How about proof of a plane crashing into a WTC tower ?
Personne n’en parle, mais il y en a une qui est incontestable.
No one talks about it, but there is one thing that is indisputable.
Steve De'ak · April 6, 2025 at 10:13 am
A lot of people talk about seeing a plane. I have met several people online who have made such claims. One even said he was a fireman evacuating people from WTC7 when Flight 175 hit the south tower.
bourgeois · April 6, 2025 at 8:24 am
Hello. I saw evidence that no one is talking about regarding the actual presence of a plane that hit the tower.
Steve De'ak · April 6, 2025 at 10:15 am
Greetings and welcome!
Please describe where you were and what you saw.
Steve
bourgeois · April 6, 2025 at 1:31 pm
Je n’y était pas. Mais il existe une photo très connue de Roberto Rabanne ou l’on voit un débris du premier avion incrusté sur la façade de la tour. Et pour moi, c’est indiscutable.
bourgeois · April 6, 2025 at 1:36 pm
Sur celle-ci
https://www.reddit.com/r/Damnthatsinteresting/comments/11gsth9/the_hole_left_by_flight_11_crashing_into_the/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button
bourgeois · April 6, 2025 at 2:30 pm
Regardez le haut de l’aile droite !
Un débris de l’aile n’est pas entré dans la tour.
Il est resté bloqué par le plancher et c’est enroulé autour de l’enjoliveur.
Steve De'ak · April 6, 2025 at 2:36 pm
Merci. Google translate:
Il y a beaucoup d’autres photos et vidéos qui montrent les mêmes dommages que ceux de M. Rabanne. C’est cette même preuve qui prouve qu’il n’a pas pu être causé par l’avion qu’on nous a montré à la télévision.
Regardez cette vidéo de 15 minutes qui explique comment les dommages n’ont pas pu être causés par un avion à réaction.
share=copy
Steve De'ak · April 6, 2025 at 2:46 pm
Pouvez-vous nous fournir un gros plan de ce à quoi vous faites référence, s’il vous plaît ?
bourgeois · April 7, 2025 at 2:59 am
Bonjour.
oui je peux vous fournir la photo mais il me faut votre adresse mail.
on ne peut pas mettre de photos sur votre blog
Steve De'ak · April 7, 2025 at 1:42 pm
Thank you. You can reach me at Steve@911crashtest.org
bourgeois · April 7, 2025 at 3:30 pm
J’ai envoyé les photos.
J’ai une question concernant la vitesse des avions.
Savez vous comment la vitesse finale des avions a été calculée ?
bourgeois · April 8, 2025 at 10:07 am
Bonjour.
J’ai aussi une théorie sur le mode de guidage vers la tour nord qui est toute simple et à la portée des pilotes d’avion de tourisme.
bourgeois · April 9, 2025 at 2:02 pm
Alors j’écris, je propose des photos, je les expédie par mail et j’en attend un débat, une discussion, une critique ……
Et rien n’arrive, pas même mes photos sur ce blog.
Dois je comprendre que la discussion est close, ou que mes réflexions sont dans le vrai et qu’elles dérangent ?
Steve De'ak · May 13, 2025 at 6:41 am
Oh hey – pardon my silence. It is nothing personal. I don’t check my email very often.
Please post on this blog. I will send you an invitation.
Steve