I spent 10 years studying 9/11 as a professional project engineer with no dog in the race, other than curiosity and a genuine desire to help humanity. Our committee at ae911truth meant well, but like your blog, descends into debating the merit of each contributor's hypothesis. Leadership denigrated Judy Woods, simply because she denigrated ae911truth.org. I took a different tack ... that almost all the presented hypotheses had merit and, that quite probably all those technically feasible would have been used. Redundancy in critical projects is not just wise, it is typical and de regur.
As to some basics, like the aircraft we all saw, a few facts fly against the aircraft hypothesis. The hijacker still alive in Morocco after the event is one. The videos showing explosions without aircraft, another. The Mossad operatives planting explosives within the towers and dancing Israelis caught with explosives in their van and eventually released to fly back to Israel to become celebrated on TV, yet another. No one witnessed aircraft. They saw it only on video. Excellent graphics, but editing went wonky showing the nose cone unscathed emerging from the other side of the building. Sloppy, but that's their trademark. We might agree, they correctly view goyim as low IQ.
Hollywood's perfecting realistic animation is very convincing.
Friends, one of the biggest issues is folks arguing about what took the buildings down. As a project engineer who owns a design/build/install firm, I ensure my people design redundancy into projects critical. Those projects that must not fail, must employ at least three blocks to failure. We use redundancy as did the bad boiz that executed 9/11. Mossad used multiple assassins as well as diversionary techniques on JFK and Charlie Kirk. As well, high level intrigue ensures official incompetence at all critical levels...eg Kash Patel's wife is a Mossad agent honey pot as was Charlie Kirk's wife. 9/11 employed nano-thermite, high frequency weaponry, nuclear devices, C4, and the devil knows what else.
Our 9/11 committee argued ad nauseum over whose hypothesis was "correct". A high level Russian explained that he found an isotope in the 9/11 dust unique to a nuclear event. But our Einsteins insisted that was impossible because we 'witnessed no mushroom shaped cloud'. Explaining that the dentist uses a nuclear device when he takes an Xray without evidence of a mushroom cloud fell on deaf ears. I tried to no avail to convince them (as the only professional engineer of the lot) that I would have used all devices available to me, and especially those kept secret from the public that paid for them like HAARP and its DEW ... that, were it any comfort to them, each of the committee members, Judy Woods and the Russian engineer were probably all correct.
Add to that, the special effects excellence developed by the Hollywood tribe, in fact they are experts at illusions. So, no, my friends, imho, no planes struck the buildings no matter what we all saw. Shanksville involved a plane but that was a screw up as the pilot actually believed in doing the right thing which nearly blew the cover off the wormy tribe. The truth may be known eventually, but like Caesar's assassination, it may take 2000 years, with so much propaganda confusing matters. Remember, expect nothing positive from the MSM as that too is controlled by the same tribe.
We at ae911truth.org spent a great deal of money on the analysis of building 7. Professor Hulsey of the University of Alaska used dynamic finite element analysis (I developed static finite element analysis to create our structures. Hulsey's work employs software and hardware a thousand times more powerful, partly designed by one of my researchers) to model the destruction of that building (which miraculously needed no aircraft to strike it, yet it collapsed like a Las Vegas derelict casino). This work allowed detailed study into the mechanics of failure. The model would not collapse until Hulsey destroyed each floor's support in timed sequence by mimicking the explosive devices that may have been used. Only then could we make the model fall just like it did in fact fall. In reality, no plane; just some timed detonation devices, nano-thermite, and some very evil people from the darkly talented tribe.
Well, yes, of course destruction of the twin towers and building 6 could have involved DEW devices as well and that may explain the fine dust even as well as nano-thermite. The Russian engineer's isotope findings mean a nuclear device was employed, too. Examining personally the DEW weaponry results in Paradise, CA, I witnessed the melted aluminum rims and 'dustified' tires on my friend's 4x4 vehicle, the utterly destroyed houses, wooden fence posts burned at the staples, trees burned from the inside out, my friend's new house with all debris cleared all round destroyed completely, yet his perfect little pear tree stood right alongside his burning patio - unscathed. It seems certain that DEW was used at 9/11 and that Judy Woods' questions were very valid.
It can be challenging to solve any murder, let alone one executed by state actors employing professional, well proven assassins, and secret weaponry all paid for by our taxes. Cooperation is the key to demystifying 9/11, with respectful discussion. I caution against "shooting the messenger" when his idea seemingly contradicts one's personally long-standing belief. Even if one was part of this grand conspiracy, it is highly unlikely that you would know all the actors and methods employed; or even its ultimate purpose. So, best to discuss with very respectful debate. In debate there are winners and losers with consequential desperation to win.
On the other hand, in discussion, all parties can walk away having gained insight and new perspectives.
Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, a redundancy approach puts paid all the arguing ad nauseum. How exactly they accomplished 9/11 may be known eventually perhaps, but we have long known enough to convict. The chosen tribe did it; I think most who have observed the blood curdling events in Gaza would agree they are capable and as a 'nation', highly motivated. Had we an uncompromised government, media and judiciary, these evil player would have been arrested years ago, sparing us their weather destruction, fires, flood, and mass covid murders.
Ill intent is and will always exist among us. Still, I think, naivety causes much more harm than downright evil.
I'd love to have a face to face with you - When can we arrange that?
Then, in your opening paragraph, your statement that Dr Wood denigrated AE911 first, is a blatant mis characterization of Dr Wood and unintentionally Dr Morgan Reynolds...
I PERSONALLY have Gage, Walter and more DENYING they know about the 2 x Qui-Tam whistleblowers cases of Dr Reynolds and Dr Wood - So, why do they LIE about these two cases?
I suggest you read this, as I have suggested it to you more than once....
9/11 Truth Suppression Timeline
"The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves." - Vladimir Lenin
A whole industry has been created - A whole "truth" movement, to have people NOT look at the evidence presented TO COURT in 2007, all whilst they are gaslighting good intentioned truth seekers with stories of remote-controlled planes or drones, CGI TV video fakery, bombs, and thermite for a controlled demolition or even buried or mini nukes.
Making sure people NEVER look at the anomalies with the 9/11 orphans, buildings 3, 4, 5, 6 and the Bankers Trust building, because if people do, they will immediately see the problems with the 9/11 truther narratives that are being SOLD to them.
Good intentioned truth seekers are FUNDING the greater cover-up of the truth of what happened on 9/11. Have a listen and read their court filings.
There are 3 issues most people have when faced with the truth regarding the events of 9/11
1. Problem solving skills
2. Group Think
3. They just can't handle the implications
Were the towers destroyed by a gravity collapse? The evidence says no.
Were the towers destroyed by explosives? The evidence says no.
Were the towers destroyed by thermite? The evidence says no.
Were the towers destroyed by nukes? The evidence says no.
The answers to these questions can easily be found by studying the evidence.
The problem is NOT a shortage of evidence.
The problem is nobody wants to LOOK at the evidence and think for themselves.
Instead, everyone wants to be TOLD WHAT TO THINK by "experts" in the MSM, alternative media, the scientific community, the government, and the "truth" movement, but these "experts" spend the whole time covering up and muddling up the evidence.
Face to face? I may have a project coming up in Angola and need to visit a client in Zimbabwe; so a little divergence to South Africa could be arranged, depending on priorities.
You have your opinions. For what it's worth, I am open to everyone's opinions, accepting those with verifiable facts as more information. When any hypothesis cannot accommodate a demonstrable fact, that hypothesis must be discarded. But tribalism, as is its nature, holds dear ideas that define the tribe. In my view, reason stops where opinion is formed. I am not interested in changing anyone's opinion. But always interested in provable facts.
As to nano-thermite, in the current vernacular, "We have the receipts." That nano-thermite was used is very clear. But, without doubt, other redundant destruction means were employed. Those in charge of this Zionist project clearly were mad, but not fools. So, several devices were used simultaneously, imho. It's a real waste of time arguing one means of destruction versus another.
But, you have your opinions, and "Damn the torpedoes!".
When I state, face to face, I mean over a Zoom call, but you're more than welcome to come visit me in South Africa, if you're buying the beer...
Your "nano-thermite receipts" are based off scientific FRAUD and Steven E. Jones and Richard Gage are truth-traitors. Once people wake up from the spell they cast over people, they will be hung from the nearest tree.
So read my "Donate now for disinformation" and listen to the embedded interview with volunteers that worked for AE911 and what stories they tell...
Dr. James R. Millette, a forensic scientist and president of MVA Scientific Consultants, conducted an independent analysis of World Trade Center (WTC) dust samples in late 2011 and early 2012.
This work was commissioned by skeptic Chris Mohr to investigate claims from the 2009 paper by Niels Harrit et al., which suggested red/gray chips in the dust were "active thermitic material" (nano-thermite).
Millette's study examined chips from four dust samples collected near Ground Zero and concluded they were consistent with primer paint used on steel structures, not thermite.
Dr David A. Hughes interview with 9/11 Revisionist
Narrative vs. evidence; Morgan Reynolds; Mark Conlon; Shanksville; the Pentagon; Curt Weldon; survivors on Stairwell B; Richard Gage; Camp 2 propaganda techniques; the 9/11 Memorial Museum.
I love that you finger the tribe and would agree that who did it shouldn't be myopically overlooked in concentrating on what happened. But I think you're wrong about accepting nano and nuke claims and naive in not noticing the disingenuous behavior of said theorists. Theories put forth sincerely do deserve respect. Those that have plausibility deserve debate. But agents w/ bad conscience deserve none, especially as they serve to muddy the waters. Too many cooks spoil the broth. If your theory can't cut the mustard, have the honesty to drop it.
I'd like to know more about the Russian nuke theorist and his demonstrative isotope finding. That mushroom cloud refutation is picking extremely low-hanging, anti-nuke fruit, a semantic nit-picking imo.
No planes seems extreme. It was championed by a tribalist. I think there were some truthful eye witnesses as well as obvious plants. Also the non-passenger jets that were seen in the area shouldn't be discarded as irrelevant.
You must be new to my Substack, so I'll give you some additional reading and listening to do...
A whole industry has been created - A whole "truth" movement, to have people NOT look at the evidence presented TO COURT in 2007, all whilst they are gaslighting good intentioned truth seekers with stories of remote-controlled planes or drones, CGI TV video fakery, bombs, and thermite for a controlled demolition or even buried or mini nukes.
Making sure people NEVER look at the anomalies with the 9/11 orphans, buildings 3, 4, 5, 6 and the Bankers Trust building, because if people do, they will immediately see the problems with the 9/11 truther narratives that are being SOLD to them.
Good intentioned truth seekers are FUNDING the greater cover-up of the truth of what happened on 9/11. Have a listen and read their court filings.
Well done to you!! Great as always mate xxx
I spent 10 years studying 9/11 as a professional project engineer with no dog in the race, other than curiosity and a genuine desire to help humanity. Our committee at ae911truth meant well, but like your blog, descends into debating the merit of each contributor's hypothesis. Leadership denigrated Judy Woods, simply because she denigrated ae911truth.org. I took a different tack ... that almost all the presented hypotheses had merit and, that quite probably all those technically feasible would have been used. Redundancy in critical projects is not just wise, it is typical and de regur.
As to some basics, like the aircraft we all saw, a few facts fly against the aircraft hypothesis. The hijacker still alive in Morocco after the event is one. The videos showing explosions without aircraft, another. The Mossad operatives planting explosives within the towers and dancing Israelis caught with explosives in their van and eventually released to fly back to Israel to become celebrated on TV, yet another. No one witnessed aircraft. They saw it only on video. Excellent graphics, but editing went wonky showing the nose cone unscathed emerging from the other side of the building. Sloppy, but that's their trademark. We might agree, they correctly view goyim as low IQ.
Hollywood's perfecting realistic animation is very convincing.
Friends, one of the biggest issues is folks arguing about what took the buildings down. As a project engineer who owns a design/build/install firm, I ensure my people design redundancy into projects critical. Those projects that must not fail, must employ at least three blocks to failure. We use redundancy as did the bad boiz that executed 9/11. Mossad used multiple assassins as well as diversionary techniques on JFK and Charlie Kirk. As well, high level intrigue ensures official incompetence at all critical levels...eg Kash Patel's wife is a Mossad agent honey pot as was Charlie Kirk's wife. 9/11 employed nano-thermite, high frequency weaponry, nuclear devices, C4, and the devil knows what else.
Our 9/11 committee argued ad nauseum over whose hypothesis was "correct". A high level Russian explained that he found an isotope in the 9/11 dust unique to a nuclear event. But our Einsteins insisted that was impossible because we 'witnessed no mushroom shaped cloud'. Explaining that the dentist uses a nuclear device when he takes an Xray without evidence of a mushroom cloud fell on deaf ears. I tried to no avail to convince them (as the only professional engineer of the lot) that I would have used all devices available to me, and especially those kept secret from the public that paid for them like HAARP and its DEW ... that, were it any comfort to them, each of the committee members, Judy Woods and the Russian engineer were probably all correct.
Add to that, the special effects excellence developed by the Hollywood tribe, in fact they are experts at illusions. So, no, my friends, imho, no planes struck the buildings no matter what we all saw. Shanksville involved a plane but that was a screw up as the pilot actually believed in doing the right thing which nearly blew the cover off the wormy tribe. The truth may be known eventually, but like Caesar's assassination, it may take 2000 years, with so much propaganda confusing matters. Remember, expect nothing positive from the MSM as that too is controlled by the same tribe.
We at ae911truth.org spent a great deal of money on the analysis of building 7. Professor Hulsey of the University of Alaska used dynamic finite element analysis (I developed static finite element analysis to create our structures. Hulsey's work employs software and hardware a thousand times more powerful, partly designed by one of my researchers) to model the destruction of that building (which miraculously needed no aircraft to strike it, yet it collapsed like a Las Vegas derelict casino). This work allowed detailed study into the mechanics of failure. The model would not collapse until Hulsey destroyed each floor's support in timed sequence by mimicking the explosive devices that may have been used. Only then could we make the model fall just like it did in fact fall. In reality, no plane; just some timed detonation devices, nano-thermite, and some very evil people from the darkly talented tribe.
Well, yes, of course destruction of the twin towers and building 6 could have involved DEW devices as well and that may explain the fine dust even as well as nano-thermite. The Russian engineer's isotope findings mean a nuclear device was employed, too. Examining personally the DEW weaponry results in Paradise, CA, I witnessed the melted aluminum rims and 'dustified' tires on my friend's 4x4 vehicle, the utterly destroyed houses, wooden fence posts burned at the staples, trees burned from the inside out, my friend's new house with all debris cleared all round destroyed completely, yet his perfect little pear tree stood right alongside his burning patio - unscathed. It seems certain that DEW was used at 9/11 and that Judy Woods' questions were very valid.
It can be challenging to solve any murder, let alone one executed by state actors employing professional, well proven assassins, and secret weaponry all paid for by our taxes. Cooperation is the key to demystifying 9/11, with respectful discussion. I caution against "shooting the messenger" when his idea seemingly contradicts one's personally long-standing belief. Even if one was part of this grand conspiracy, it is highly unlikely that you would know all the actors and methods employed; or even its ultimate purpose. So, best to discuss with very respectful debate. In debate there are winners and losers with consequential desperation to win.
On the other hand, in discussion, all parties can walk away having gained insight and new perspectives.
Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, a redundancy approach puts paid all the arguing ad nauseum. How exactly they accomplished 9/11 may be known eventually perhaps, but we have long known enough to convict. The chosen tribe did it; I think most who have observed the blood curdling events in Gaza would agree they are capable and as a 'nation', highly motivated. Had we an uncompromised government, media and judiciary, these evil player would have been arrested years ago, sparing us their weather destruction, fires, flood, and mass covid murders.
Ill intent is and will always exist among us. Still, I think, naivety causes much more harm than downright evil.
I'd love to have a face to face with you - When can we arrange that?
Then, in your opening paragraph, your statement that Dr Wood denigrated AE911 first, is a blatant mis characterization of Dr Wood and unintentionally Dr Morgan Reynolds...
Andrew Johnson meticulously recorded everything happening in the 9/11 "truth" movement, since the formation of Scholars for 9/11 truth, and we discussed all the shenanigans in this interview: https://911revision.substack.com/p/andrew-johnson-understanding-where
I PERSONALLY have Gage, Walter and more DENYING they know about the 2 x Qui-Tam whistleblowers cases of Dr Reynolds and Dr Wood - So, why do they LIE about these two cases?
I suggest you read this, as I have suggested it to you more than once....
9/11 Truth Suppression Timeline
"The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves." - Vladimir Lenin
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/911-truth-suppression-timeline
A whole industry has been created - A whole "truth" movement, to have people NOT look at the evidence presented TO COURT in 2007, all whilst they are gaslighting good intentioned truth seekers with stories of remote-controlled planes or drones, CGI TV video fakery, bombs, and thermite for a controlled demolition or even buried or mini nukes.
Making sure people NEVER look at the anomalies with the 9/11 orphans, buildings 3, 4, 5, 6 and the Bankers Trust building, because if people do, they will immediately see the problems with the 9/11 truther narratives that are being SOLD to them.
Good intentioned truth seekers are FUNDING the greater cover-up of the truth of what happened on 9/11. Have a listen and read their court filings.
Dr Reynolds' case was for the fraudulent plane impact reports: https://nomoregames.net/2011/06/12/request-for-correction-by-nist-for-its-invalid-wtc-jetliner-animations-and-analyses/
Dr Wood's case was for the destruction at the WTC complex: https://www.doctorjudywood.com/articles/NIST/Qui_Tam_Wood.html
9/11 FACTS that hurt people's feelings
43 FACTS that cannot be explained due to jet fuel, bombs, thermite or nukes
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/911-facts-that-hurt-peoples-feelings
There are 3 issues most people have when faced with the truth regarding the events of 9/11
1. Problem solving skills
2. Group Think
3. They just can't handle the implications
Were the towers destroyed by a gravity collapse? The evidence says no.
Were the towers destroyed by explosives? The evidence says no.
Were the towers destroyed by thermite? The evidence says no.
Were the towers destroyed by nukes? The evidence says no.
The answers to these questions can easily be found by studying the evidence.
The problem is NOT a shortage of evidence.
The problem is nobody wants to LOOK at the evidence and think for themselves.
Instead, everyone wants to be TOLD WHAT TO THINK by "experts" in the MSM, alternative media, the scientific community, the government, and the "truth" movement, but these "experts" spend the whole time covering up and muddling up the evidence.
Here is a 20-minute video that most can follow: https://rumble.com/v5jnndx-understanding-the-911-evidence.html
Face to face? I may have a project coming up in Angola and need to visit a client in Zimbabwe; so a little divergence to South Africa could be arranged, depending on priorities.
You have your opinions. For what it's worth, I am open to everyone's opinions, accepting those with verifiable facts as more information. When any hypothesis cannot accommodate a demonstrable fact, that hypothesis must be discarded. But tribalism, as is its nature, holds dear ideas that define the tribe. In my view, reason stops where opinion is formed. I am not interested in changing anyone's opinion. But always interested in provable facts.
As to nano-thermite, in the current vernacular, "We have the receipts." That nano-thermite was used is very clear. But, without doubt, other redundant destruction means were employed. Those in charge of this Zionist project clearly were mad, but not fools. So, several devices were used simultaneously, imho. It's a real waste of time arguing one means of destruction versus another.
But, you have your opinions, and "Damn the torpedoes!".
When I state, face to face, I mean over a Zoom call, but you're more than welcome to come visit me in South Africa, if you're buying the beer...
Your "nano-thermite receipts" are based off scientific FRAUD and Steven E. Jones and Richard Gage are truth-traitors. Once people wake up from the spell they cast over people, they will be hung from the nearest tree.
So read my "Donate now for disinformation" and listen to the embedded interview with volunteers that worked for AE911 and what stories they tell...
You can download the Refutation of Richard Gage’s Game in 2008 AND 2023: https://truthsummit.info/media-files/DrJudyWood-refutation-RichardGage-claims.pdf
Ending the Nano-Thermite 9/11 Hypothesis for the World Trade Center Catastrophe
With basic, easy to verify research - Case closed.
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/ending-the-nano-thermite-911-hypothesis
Dr. James Millette's 2012 WTC Dust Analysis
Dr. James R. Millette, a forensic scientist and president of MVA Scientific Consultants, conducted an independent analysis of World Trade Center (WTC) dust samples in late 2011 and early 2012.
This work was commissioned by skeptic Chris Mohr to investigate claims from the 2009 paper by Niels Harrit et al., which suggested red/gray chips in the dust were "active thermitic material" (nano-thermite).
Millette's study examined chips from four dust samples collected near Ground Zero and concluded they were consistent with primer paint used on steel structures, not thermite.
Find it here: https://internationalskeptics.com/forums/index.php?threads/wtc-dust-study-feb-29-2012-by-dr-james-millette.231314/
Dr Denis Rancourt: 2010 Death Blows to the 9/11 Nano-Thermite Hypothesis
The 9/11 Nano-Thermite Hypothesis and over 15 years of lies
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/denis-rancourt-2010-death-blows-to
I highly recommend studying the blog: The Thermite Free Zone
Link: http://911thermitefree.blogspot.com/
WTC Molten Metal: Fact or Fiction?
Analysis of the Evidence at Ground Zero
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/wtc-molten-metal-fact-or-fiction
9/11 FACTS that hurt people's feelings
43 FACTS that cannot be explained due to jet fuel, bombs, thermite or nukes
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/911-facts-that-hurt-peoples-feelings
Dr David A. Hughes interview with 9/11 Revisionist
Narrative vs. evidence; Morgan Reynolds; Mark Conlon; Shanksville; the Pentagon; Curt Weldon; survivors on Stairwell B; Richard Gage; Camp 2 propaganda techniques; the 9/11 Memorial Museum.
Interview: https://911revision.substack.com/p/david-hughes-on-the-importance-of
I love that you finger the tribe and would agree that who did it shouldn't be myopically overlooked in concentrating on what happened. But I think you're wrong about accepting nano and nuke claims and naive in not noticing the disingenuous behavior of said theorists. Theories put forth sincerely do deserve respect. Those that have plausibility deserve debate. But agents w/ bad conscience deserve none, especially as they serve to muddy the waters. Too many cooks spoil the broth. If your theory can't cut the mustard, have the honesty to drop it.
I'd like to know more about the Russian nuke theorist and his demonstrative isotope finding. That mushroom cloud refutation is picking extremely low-hanging, anti-nuke fruit, a semantic nit-picking imo.
No planes seems extreme. It was championed by a tribalist. I think there were some truthful eye witnesses as well as obvious plants. Also the non-passenger jets that were seen in the area shouldn't be discarded as irrelevant.
You must be new to my Substack, so I'll give you some additional reading and listening to do...
A whole industry has been created - A whole "truth" movement, to have people NOT look at the evidence presented TO COURT in 2007, all whilst they are gaslighting good intentioned truth seekers with stories of remote-controlled planes or drones, CGI TV video fakery, bombs, and thermite for a controlled demolition or even buried or mini nukes.
Making sure people NEVER look at the anomalies with the 9/11 orphans, buildings 3, 4, 5, 6 and the Bankers Trust building, because if people do, they will immediately see the problems with the 9/11 truther narratives that are being SOLD to them.
Good intentioned truth seekers are FUNDING the greater cover-up of the truth of what happened on 9/11. Have a listen and read their court filings.
Dr Reynolds' case was for the fraudulent plane impact reports: https://nomoregames.net/2011/06/12/request-for-correction-by-nist-for-its-invalid-wtc-jetliner-animations-and-analyses/
Dr Wood's case was for the destruction at the WTC complex: https://www.doctorjudywood.com/articles/NIST/Qui_Tam_Wood.html
9/11 Truth Suppression Timeline
"The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves." - Vladimir Lenin
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/911-truth-suppression-timeline
9/11 FACTS that hurt people's feelings
43 FACTS that cannot be explained due to jet fuel, bombs, thermite or nukes
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/911-facts-that-hurt-peoples-feelings
Understanding Where the Towers Went with Andrew Johnson
A 20 year odyssey in exposing the lies and distractions regarding 9/11 truth
Interview: https://911revision.substack.com/p/andrew-johnson-understanding-where
Have you seen this?
10 years after 9/11, people were unable to make cellphone calls from an airplane https://rumble.com/v735af8-10-years-after-911-people-were-unable-to-make-cellphone-calls-from-an-airpl.html?e9s=src_v1_cmd%2Csrc_v1_upp_a
Yes, the person ripped it off my X post from 17 December...
Link: https://x.com/i/status/2001260930764574831