Fact Check: Is going barefoot better than wearing shoes?

Fact Check: Is going barefoot better than wearing shoes?

Published April 19, 2025
±
VERDICT
Partially True

# Is Going Barefoot Better Than Wearing Shoes? ## Introduction The claim that "going barefoot is better than wearing shoes" has garnered attention in...

Is Going Barefoot Better Than Wearing Shoes?

Introduction

The claim that "going barefoot is better than wearing shoes" has garnered attention in health and wellness discussions. Proponents argue that walking barefoot can enhance foot strength, improve balance, and promote a more natural gait. However, this assertion raises questions about the contexts in which barefoot walking is beneficial and the potential risks associated with it. This article examines the available evidence and perspectives on the topic without reaching a definitive conclusion.

What We Know

  1. Psychological Benefits: According to a study from UC Santa Barbara, walking barefoot outdoors can lead to higher levels of connectedness and psychological restoration compared to wearing shoes, suggesting potential mental health benefits from going barefoot in natural environments 1.

  2. Physical Benefits: An article from the Times of India highlights that barefoot walking can strengthen foot muscles, enhance balance, and support natural movement, particularly in safe environments like grass or sand 2.

  3. Injury Risks: While there are benefits to going barefoot, a systematic review published in ScienceDirect emphasizes that shoes provide essential protection from injuries, especially on hard or rough surfaces 6.

  4. Gait and Foot Health: A review from GoodRx notes that barefoot walking can improve foot mechanics and ankle range of motion, which may be beneficial for overall foot health 7. However, it also acknowledges that shoes can accommodate comfort needs and protect against environmental hazards 4.

  5. Mixed Perspectives: A comparison of barefoot walking and supportive shoes from Longevity Now discusses the advantages of both approaches, suggesting that while barefoot walking has merits, supportive footwear also plays a crucial role in foot health 9.

Analysis

The evidence surrounding the benefits and drawbacks of barefoot walking versus wearing shoes is multifaceted.

  • Source Reliability: The sources cited range from academic studies to popular health articles. For example, the systematic review published in ScienceDirect 6 provides a rigorous analysis of existing research, making it a reliable source. In contrast, articles from lifestyle websites like GoodRx 7 and Longevity Now 9 may contain useful information but could be influenced by the authors' perspectives or the publication's audience.

  • Potential Bias: Some sources may have inherent biases. For instance, articles promoting barefoot shoes 8 may emphasize the benefits of going barefoot while downplaying the risks associated with it. Additionally, the Times of India article 2 may cater to a readership that favors natural health practices, potentially skewing its presentation of the evidence.

  • Methodological Concerns: Many of the claims about the benefits of barefoot walking are based on anecdotal evidence or small-scale studies. Larger, controlled studies would be beneficial to substantiate these claims. Furthermore, the context of barefoot walking—such as the type of surface and environment—plays a significant role in its safety and effectiveness.

  • Conflicting Information: While some sources advocate for barefoot walking, others highlight the protective benefits of shoes. For instance, the article from Foot and Ankle Spec discusses how shoes can prevent injuries from sharp objects and extreme temperatures 5. This contradiction underscores the need for a nuanced understanding of when and where barefoot walking might be advantageous.

Conclusion

Verdict: Partially True

The claim that going barefoot is better than wearing shoes is partially true, as there are both benefits and risks associated with each approach. Evidence suggests that barefoot walking can enhance psychological well-being, strengthen foot muscles, and improve gait mechanics, particularly in safe environments. However, it is equally important to recognize that shoes provide essential protection against injuries and environmental hazards, which can be significant depending on the walking surface.

The nuances of this topic highlight the importance of context; the benefits of barefoot walking may be more pronounced in certain environments, such as soft grass or sand, while the risks increase on hard or rough surfaces. Additionally, the evidence is not uniformly robust, with many claims relying on anecdotal reports or small studies, indicating a need for further research to draw more definitive conclusions.

Readers should approach this topic critically, considering both the potential advantages of barefoot walking and the protective role of shoes. It is essential to evaluate personal circumstances and environments when deciding whether to go barefoot or wear shoes.

Sources

  1. UC Santa Barbara - Walking Barefoot | Health & Wellness. Link
  2. Times of India - Walking barefoot vs walking wearing shoes: Which is better and why? Link
  3. Scientific American - Going Barefoot Is Good for the Sole. Link
  4. WellWisp - What Are the Differences in Foot Health Between Going Barefoot and Wearing Shoes? Link
  5. Foot and Ankle Spec - The Pros And Cons of Walking Barefoot. Link
  6. ScienceDirect - Barefoot vs common footwear: A systematic review of the differences in gait variables. Link
  7. GoodRx - 4 Benefits of Walking Barefoot and Risks to Consider. Link
  8. Upstep - Are Barefoot Shoes Good for You? A Podiatrist's Perspective. Link
  9. Longevity Now - The Surprising Pros and Cons of Barefoot Walking vs. Supportive Shoes. Link
  10. New York Post - 4 unexpected benefits of walking around barefoot. Link

Have a claim you want to verify? It's 100% Free!

Our AI-powered fact-checker analyzes claims against thousands of reliable sources and provides evidence-based verdicts in seconds. Completely free with no registration required.

💡 Try:
"Coffee helps you live longer"
100% Free
No Registration
Instant Results

Comments

Leave a comment

Loading comments...

More Fact Checks to Explore

Discover similar claims and stay informed with these related fact-checks

Fact Check: Transcript
00:00
Are Trump's approval ratings in
the tank? Let's check it out. I
mean every politician would
like this number here
especially to see it go up. How
about compared to other
presidents who are Republicans?
Yeah. It's history making. It's
history making. What are we
talking about here? So why
don't we look back? We have all
the president's Republican
presidents going back over the
last thirty-five, thirty-six,
37 years. What are we talking
about? GOP who strongly
approved 5 months in. Look at
this. George, HW Bush, Bush
forty1, 46%. Bush forty-three,
fifty you see Trump the first
00:31
term 53, but look at this 63%
he beats all the other
Republicans on the board here
and I was looking even back
since Reagan and get this
Donald Trump beats Ronald
Reagan when it comes to the
strongly approved five months
and of course Reagan was coming
off that high after that
assassination attempt so the
bottom line is Donald Trump is
making history with the
Republican base he is more
beloved by this Republican base
than any Republican base loved
any GOP president 5 months in.
It is history making. Even CNN
01:03
is telling the truth. Feels
like hell might be freezing
over.
Partially True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 Are Trump's approval ratings in the tank? Let's check it out. I mean every politician would like this number here especially to see it go up. How about compared to other presidents who are Republicans? Yeah. It's history making. It's history making. What are we talking about here? So why don't we look back? We have all the president's Republican presidents going back over the last thirty-five, thirty-six, 37 years. What are we talking about? GOP who strongly approved 5 months in. Look at this. George, HW Bush, Bush forty1, 46%. Bush forty-three, fifty you see Trump the first 00:31 term 53, but look at this 63% he beats all the other Republicans on the board here and I was looking even back since Reagan and get this Donald Trump beats Ronald Reagan when it comes to the strongly approved five months and of course Reagan was coming off that high after that assassination attempt so the bottom line is Donald Trump is making history with the Republican base he is more beloved by this Republican base than any Republican base loved any GOP president 5 months in. It is history making. Even CNN 01:03 is telling the truth. Feels like hell might be freezing over.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Transcript 00:00 Are Trump's approval ratings in the tank? Let's check it out. I mean every politician would like this number here especially to see it go up. How about compared to other presidents who are Republicans? Yeah. It's history making. It's history making. What are we talking about here? So why don't we look back? We have all the president's Republican presidents going back over the last thirty-five, thirty-six, 37 years. What are we talking about? GOP who strongly approved 5 months in. Look at this. George, HW Bush, Bush forty1, 46%. Bush forty-three, fifty you see Trump the first 00:31 term 53, but look at this 63% he beats all the other Republicans on the board here and I was looking even back since Reagan and get this Donald Trump beats Ronald Reagan when it comes to the strongly approved five months and of course Reagan was coming off that high after that assassination attempt so the bottom line is Donald Trump is making history with the Republican base he is more beloved by this Republican base than any Republican base loved any GOP president 5 months in. It is history making. Even CNN 01:03 is telling the truth. Feels like hell might be freezing over.

Aug 4, 2025
Read more →
🔍
Partially True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 For all of their strutting about protesting that they support democracy. Not a one of them gave a damn about democracy when they pulled Biden off the ballot and dropped Kamala Harris in without a single Democrat primary voter voting for him. And you know what? Not a single Democrat is here today because not a single one of them gives a damn about the fact that they lied to the American people for four years. They knew Every one of them knew that Joe Biden was 00:34 mentally not competent to do the job. The White House Press Secretary. She knew when she stood in front of the American people and lied over and over and over again and they're not here because they can't defend themselves. It wasn't a surprise for four years the White House hid President Biden from Republican Senators. Would not let him meet with us. He served 40 years in this body. We all know him. And they deliberately lied and by the way Jake Tapper had a bombshell 01:08 book exposing the incredible scandal that Biden's mental decline was covered up by Jake Tapper. There's a Yiddish word and that truly is how dare we lie and cover up what we all knew. Now I have been asked literally a thousand times by Texans. Was running the country? And I'm going to give 01:40 you the most terrifying answer. I don't know. I genuinely don't know. And not a single Democrat here cares. The most telling proof of Biden's decline came with the signature of the president. The symbol of executive authority that was outsourced to a machine. Mister Wald you're a lawyer who served in the White House Council's Office. You understand the gravity of presidential action. Does the president's signature 02:10 carry legal and constitutional weight under article two? Yes. Is the act of signing an executive order or signing a law or granting a pardon a delegable duty of the president. Uh so in that opinion in 2005 from OLC they said essentially that an autopin could be used by a subordinate but the president's determination as to sign the document can never be delegated. Can that authority 02:41 be transferred to a staff or a machine without the president's explicit authorization? Never. And if you look at the statistics, the statistics are stunning. In 2021, President Biden issued 78 executive orders. None were signed with an auto pen. That first year the presidency, Biden I suppose was relatively lucid and 78 executive orders he signed by hand. The second year, however, we see the auto pen emerged. 03:15 The first auto pen executive order was issued on 15th 2022. After that day 100% of the executive orders issued in 2022 were signed by an autopen. In 2023 Biden issued twenty-four executive orders. 16 were auto penned. In 20twenty-four Biden issued 19. 14 were auto penned. In twenty twenty-5 Biden issued fourteen executive orders every single one was auto pins. 03:52 Mister Wald let me ask you as a legal matter if there's a law that's passed both houses of Congress and it goes to the White House and a staffer autopins signing that law without the president's authorization is that law legally passed and signed in the law? No. If an executive order is issued and a staffer autopins it without the president's authorization, is that executive order legally binding? No. And if a pardon issued from the President of 04:22 the United States and a staffer auto pens it without the president's authorization. Is that pardon legally binding? No. Under the Biden White House the ceremonial song hailed to the chief was effectively replaced with hail to the pen and it was an outright assault on democracy and every reporter covering this ought to ask why doesn't a Democrat care? We heard about the moral responsibilities of a staffer. 04:54 How about an elected senator who knows damn well that if we get into a war and Iran is preparing to fire a nuclear weapon at the United States that the commander in chief is busy playing with his jello and he's not competent to defend ourselves and every member of the cabinet, the chief of staff, the press secretary, and the members of Congress who lied about this on a daily basis with the press's complicity. They are all responsible for subverting democracy. Angry Ted Cruz is perhaps my favorite version of 05:27 Ted Cruz because when he's getting history on it, you might want to take a listen. He is definitely angry that there's some acting going on here in the line of hail to the chief change from hail to the pen that's not a smart line but it's still the truth. The truth is in this video right here ladies and gentlemen. The change in the way Joe Biden used the autopin is a steady upward moving graph from twenty twenty-one to the end of his presidency in early twenty 05:58 twenty-five. Okay? That is a noticeable issue. And if he does not directly authorize the autopin we've got We've got grounds to go through every single law Joe Biden has signed that way and perhaps ignore them all together. There's way more evidence behind the autopin theory and hopefully it ends up sticking. I I hope it does because I think this is in a way worse than the Bill Clinton perjury case. Cuz Bill 06:28 Clinton basically lied before Congress lied directly to the American people lied under oath. This is worse in a way. Because lying under oath means that you know where the truth is and you're just hoping to get away with it and there's a direct law. This however Signing with the auto pin is more opaque. It is an ultimate he said she said and you're dont rate the opinion oo just fact if there is

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Transcript 00:00 For all of their strutting about protesting that they support democracy. Not a one of them gave a damn about democracy when they pulled Biden off the ballot and dropped Kamala Harris in without a single Democrat primary voter voting for him. And you know what? Not a single Democrat is here today because not a single one of them gives a damn about the fact that they lied to the American people for four years. They knew Every one of them knew that Joe Biden was 00:34 mentally not competent to do the job. The White House Press Secretary. She knew when she stood in front of the American people and lied over and over and over again and they're not here because they can't defend themselves. It wasn't a surprise for four years the White House hid President Biden from Republican Senators. Would not let him meet with us. He served 40 years in this body. We all know him. And they deliberately lied and by the way Jake Tapper had a bombshell 01:08 book exposing the incredible scandal that Biden's mental decline was covered up by Jake Tapper. There's a Yiddish word and that truly is how dare we lie and cover up what we all knew. Now I have been asked literally a thousand times by Texans. Was running the country? And I'm going to give 01:40 you the most terrifying answer. I don't know. I genuinely don't know. And not a single Democrat here cares. The most telling proof of Biden's decline came with the signature of the president. The symbol of executive authority that was outsourced to a machine. Mister Wald you're a lawyer who served in the White House Council's Office. You understand the gravity of presidential action. Does the president's signature 02:10 carry legal and constitutional weight under article two? Yes. Is the act of signing an executive order or signing a law or granting a pardon a delegable duty of the president. Uh so in that opinion in 2005 from OLC they said essentially that an autopin could be used by a subordinate but the president's determination as to sign the document can never be delegated. Can that authority 02:41 be transferred to a staff or a machine without the president's explicit authorization? Never. And if you look at the statistics, the statistics are stunning. In 2021, President Biden issued 78 executive orders. None were signed with an auto pen. That first year the presidency, Biden I suppose was relatively lucid and 78 executive orders he signed by hand. The second year, however, we see the auto pen emerged. 03:15 The first auto pen executive order was issued on 15th 2022. After that day 100% of the executive orders issued in 2022 were signed by an autopen. In 2023 Biden issued twenty-four executive orders. 16 were auto penned. In 20twenty-four Biden issued 19. 14 were auto penned. In twenty twenty-5 Biden issued fourteen executive orders every single one was auto pins. 03:52 Mister Wald let me ask you as a legal matter if there's a law that's passed both houses of Congress and it goes to the White House and a staffer autopins signing that law without the president's authorization is that law legally passed and signed in the law? No. If an executive order is issued and a staffer autopins it without the president's authorization, is that executive order legally binding? No. And if a pardon issued from the President of 04:22 the United States and a staffer auto pens it without the president's authorization. Is that pardon legally binding? No. Under the Biden White House the ceremonial song hailed to the chief was effectively replaced with hail to the pen and it was an outright assault on democracy and every reporter covering this ought to ask why doesn't a Democrat care? We heard about the moral responsibilities of a staffer. 04:54 How about an elected senator who knows damn well that if we get into a war and Iran is preparing to fire a nuclear weapon at the United States that the commander in chief is busy playing with his jello and he's not competent to defend ourselves and every member of the cabinet, the chief of staff, the press secretary, and the members of Congress who lied about this on a daily basis with the press's complicity. They are all responsible for subverting democracy. Angry Ted Cruz is perhaps my favorite version of 05:27 Ted Cruz because when he's getting history on it, you might want to take a listen. He is definitely angry that there's some acting going on here in the line of hail to the chief change from hail to the pen that's not a smart line but it's still the truth. The truth is in this video right here ladies and gentlemen. The change in the way Joe Biden used the autopin is a steady upward moving graph from twenty twenty-one to the end of his presidency in early twenty 05:58 twenty-five. Okay? That is a noticeable issue. And if he does not directly authorize the autopin we've got We've got grounds to go through every single law Joe Biden has signed that way and perhaps ignore them all together. There's way more evidence behind the autopin theory and hopefully it ends up sticking. I I hope it does because I think this is in a way worse than the Bill Clinton perjury case. Cuz Bill 06:28 Clinton basically lied before Congress lied directly to the American people lied under oath. This is worse in a way. Because lying under oath means that you know where the truth is and you're just hoping to get away with it and there's a direct law. This however Signing with the auto pin is more opaque. It is an ultimate he said she said and you're dont rate the opinion oo just fact if there is

Jul 27, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Covid nimbus. Here's the symptom you need to know about that nobody's talking about. What's that? You haven't heard of COVID nimbus? Probably need to talk about that too. So let's get to it. Stick to the end. I'll talk a little bit about prevention. So COVID nimbus is the newest variant going on. It is NB. 1. 8. 1. Say that three times fast. And the unfortunate part about this is it looks like it's more contagious than other variants that we've had recently but it doesn't look so bad that it's going to wind you up necessarily in the hospital. But if you followed me at all you know that that's not necessarily the worst thing 00:32 that happens. You can still develop long COVID from any COVID infection that you get no matter how serious it is or not. But it has a gnarly symptom we have not really seen with COVID in the past. And it mimics other things that we see this tiny year so it's going to be even more important that you test for it when you start getting sick. And it's being associated with razor blades. I know it's not from when you pee so don't worry about that one. Don't go down that road. It's at being associated with the sensation of swallowing razor blades because it causes such a severe sore throat it is akin 01:06 to that sensation. And that can be a similar symptom to a lot of other things particularly things we see in kids like strep throat. Or in older kids things like mononucles. Which you also see surges in usually in summer. But prevention things seem to work the same as they've been working. So vaccinate and if you can get a booster and you haven't like in the last three to six months talk to your doctor about doing so. If you are at high risk and have autoimmune issues or autoimmune suppressants do like I did which is get monoclonal antibodies to protect you
Partially True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Covid nimbus. Here's the symptom you need to know about that nobody's talking about. What's that? You haven't heard of COVID nimbus? Probably need to talk about that too. So let's get to it. Stick to the end. I'll talk a little bit about prevention. So COVID nimbus is the newest variant going on. It is NB. 1. 8. 1. Say that three times fast. And the unfortunate part about this is it looks like it's more contagious than other variants that we've had recently but it doesn't look so bad that it's going to wind you up necessarily in the hospital. But if you followed me at all you know that that's not necessarily the worst thing 00:32 that happens. You can still develop long COVID from any COVID infection that you get no matter how serious it is or not. But it has a gnarly symptom we have not really seen with COVID in the past. And it mimics other things that we see this tiny year so it's going to be even more important that you test for it when you start getting sick. And it's being associated with razor blades. I know it's not from when you pee so don't worry about that one. Don't go down that road. It's at being associated with the sensation of swallowing razor blades because it causes such a severe sore throat it is akin 01:06 to that sensation. And that can be a similar symptom to a lot of other things particularly things we see in kids like strep throat. Or in older kids things like mononucles. Which you also see surges in usually in summer. But prevention things seem to work the same as they've been working. So vaccinate and if you can get a booster and you haven't like in the last three to six months talk to your doctor about doing so. If you are at high risk and have autoimmune issues or autoimmune suppressants do like I did which is get monoclonal antibodies to protect you

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Covid nimbus. Here's the symptom you need to know about that nobody's talking about. What's that? You haven't heard of COVID nimbus? Probably need to talk about that too. So let's get to it. Stick to the end. I'll talk a little bit about prevention. So COVID nimbus is the newest variant going on. It is NB. 1. 8. 1. Say that three times fast. And the unfortunate part about this is it looks like it's more contagious than other variants that we've had recently but it doesn't look so bad that it's going to wind you up necessarily in the hospital. But if you followed me at all you know that that's not necessarily the worst thing 00:32 that happens. You can still develop long COVID from any COVID infection that you get no matter how serious it is or not. But it has a gnarly symptom we have not really seen with COVID in the past. And it mimics other things that we see this tiny year so it's going to be even more important that you test for it when you start getting sick. And it's being associated with razor blades. I know it's not from when you pee so don't worry about that one. Don't go down that road. It's at being associated with the sensation of swallowing razor blades because it causes such a severe sore throat it is akin 01:06 to that sensation. And that can be a similar symptom to a lot of other things particularly things we see in kids like strep throat. Or in older kids things like mononucles. Which you also see surges in usually in summer. But prevention things seem to work the same as they've been working. So vaccinate and if you can get a booster and you haven't like in the last three to six months talk to your doctor about doing so. If you are at high risk and have autoimmune issues or autoimmune suppressants do like I did which is get monoclonal antibodies to protect you

Jul 22, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Transcript
00:00
911 was a false flag. For the
first 10 years, I did not think
anything other than the
official narrative then after
being shown a video, a close up
video of building number seven
coming down and that got me
going because it's obvious to
me that building seven was was
a controlled demolition because
the building collapses from the
bottom down. The trade centers
were unique in that they were
designed to withstand the
00:33
impact of a a a jet. From what
I understand the the outer
skeleton of the building. The
outer columns was like a a fish
net and you had these inner
core columns which was
substantial thick steel beams
to withstand four or five times
what the loads were. Got it.
The engineers always over
design a building. No steel
frame building has ever
collapsed before or since 9/
eleven. So that should say
something right there. And it
said that building seven it was
01:05
aggressive collapse that it was
caused by fire but progressive
collapse unlike the twin
towers, the twin towers
collapse from the top down.
That's a progressive collapse.
Sure. Floor by floor by floor.
But if you look at the videos
of building seven collapsing,
it collapses uniformly, it's
collapsing from the bottom, the
building stays intact all the
way to the bottom of the ground
and you could see the sides
caving in on it. For a building
to collapse uniformly which the
video show all the load bearing
it would have to have failed
01:36
simultaneously. Now, fire
doesn't act like that. I came
across an analogy of the twin
towers and if you could
visualize cast iron stoves
stacked. One on top of each
other. The stoves up at the
top. Yes, there's fire and
they've been damaged but the
stoves on the bottom, they
haven't been damaged. Okay. So,
the structure underneath all of
that is intact. So, it's
impossible for a building to
collapse near free fall speed
and increase. Without a
02:07
controlled demolition. You're
running into the path of most
resistance. I something else is
going on. I don't believe that
it was just the planes or the
fires I think that and they
examine the dust and they found
what they call thermitic
material which is like a
explosive incendiary which was
in the dust samples and that's
documented. There were reports
of the buildings were
undergoing a extensive elevator
renovation in the two or three
years prior to all kinds of
02:40
workers they had access to the
the core the cores of the
building and on the day of the
attack the the elevator company
would not assist in the
operations of the elevators and
the elevator company was the
elevator company it
subsequently went out of
business and a couple of years
after that
False

Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 911 was a false flag. For the first 10 years, I did not think anything other than the official narrative then after being shown a video, a close up video of building number seven coming down and that got me going because it's obvious to me that building seven was was a controlled demolition because the building collapses from the bottom down. The trade centers were unique in that they were designed to withstand the 00:33 impact of a a a jet. From what I understand the the outer skeleton of the building. The outer columns was like a a fish net and you had these inner core columns which was substantial thick steel beams to withstand four or five times what the loads were. Got it. The engineers always over design a building. No steel frame building has ever collapsed before or since 9/ eleven. So that should say something right there. And it said that building seven it was 01:05 aggressive collapse that it was caused by fire but progressive collapse unlike the twin towers, the twin towers collapse from the top down. That's a progressive collapse. Sure. Floor by floor by floor. But if you look at the videos of building seven collapsing, it collapses uniformly, it's collapsing from the bottom, the building stays intact all the way to the bottom of the ground and you could see the sides caving in on it. For a building to collapse uniformly which the video show all the load bearing it would have to have failed 01:36 simultaneously. Now, fire doesn't act like that. I came across an analogy of the twin towers and if you could visualize cast iron stoves stacked. One on top of each other. The stoves up at the top. Yes, there's fire and they've been damaged but the stoves on the bottom, they haven't been damaged. Okay. So, the structure underneath all of that is intact. So, it's impossible for a building to collapse near free fall speed and increase. Without a 02:07 controlled demolition. You're running into the path of most resistance. I something else is going on. I don't believe that it was just the planes or the fires I think that and they examine the dust and they found what they call thermitic material which is like a explosive incendiary which was in the dust samples and that's documented. There were reports of the buildings were undergoing a extensive elevator renovation in the two or three years prior to all kinds of 02:40 workers they had access to the the core the cores of the building and on the day of the attack the the elevator company would not assist in the operations of the elevators and the elevator company was the elevator company it subsequently went out of business and a couple of years after that

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Transcript 00:00 911 was a false flag. For the first 10 years, I did not think anything other than the official narrative then after being shown a video, a close up video of building number seven coming down and that got me going because it's obvious to me that building seven was was a controlled demolition because the building collapses from the bottom down. The trade centers were unique in that they were designed to withstand the 00:33 impact of a a a jet. From what I understand the the outer skeleton of the building. The outer columns was like a a fish net and you had these inner core columns which was substantial thick steel beams to withstand four or five times what the loads were. Got it. The engineers always over design a building. No steel frame building has ever collapsed before or since 9/ eleven. So that should say something right there. And it said that building seven it was 01:05 aggressive collapse that it was caused by fire but progressive collapse unlike the twin towers, the twin towers collapse from the top down. That's a progressive collapse. Sure. Floor by floor by floor. But if you look at the videos of building seven collapsing, it collapses uniformly, it's collapsing from the bottom, the building stays intact all the way to the bottom of the ground and you could see the sides caving in on it. For a building to collapse uniformly which the video show all the load bearing it would have to have failed 01:36 simultaneously. Now, fire doesn't act like that. I came across an analogy of the twin towers and if you could visualize cast iron stoves stacked. One on top of each other. The stoves up at the top. Yes, there's fire and they've been damaged but the stoves on the bottom, they haven't been damaged. Okay. So, the structure underneath all of that is intact. So, it's impossible for a building to collapse near free fall speed and increase. Without a 02:07 controlled demolition. You're running into the path of most resistance. I something else is going on. I don't believe that it was just the planes or the fires I think that and they examine the dust and they found what they call thermitic material which is like a explosive incendiary which was in the dust samples and that's documented. There were reports of the buildings were undergoing a extensive elevator renovation in the two or three years prior to all kinds of 02:40 workers they had access to the the core the cores of the building and on the day of the attack the the elevator company would not assist in the operations of the elevators and the elevator company was the elevator company it subsequently went out of business and a couple of years after that

Jul 28, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Transcript
00:00
Not trying to freak anybody
out. I wasn't going to talk
about this for a while but is
anyone else like looking into
the fact that there's 76
volcanoes that are currently
erupting. Our polls have moved
astronomic. Like they're
they're moving faster than they
ever have in history. And on
top of that we've got the
earthquakes everywhere and the
fires. We've got earthquakes
that are happening at
Yellowstone National Park and
Santorini which are two of the
most massive volcanoes. Like we
have the the gases that are
00:31
coming from these different
volcanic eruptions that are
spreading all over the planet
and then on top of that we've
also got the solar flares that
are hitting the magnetic field
of our planet which if it
weakens enough can actually
cause the the poles to flip.
And that's concerning because
if you've looked into what
happens if that I mean we don't
know for sure. It's
theoretical. For entertainment
purposes only always and
forever. Of course. But at
Theoretically it wouldn't be
good. Who knows? There could be
01:07
like some saving grace. Maybe
it won't happen. Maybe it'll
just all calm down. But it goes
along also with the hopey
prophecy. Of the the two
brothers or twins flipping and
then the weakening and then the
the floods and all that that
jazz that seems to be And then
we've got the airplanes on top
of that which could either be
maybe from the magnetic field
or the solar flares or from the
poles shifting. I have no idea.
But there's a lot of pl
False

Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 Not trying to freak anybody out. I wasn't going to talk about this for a while but is anyone else like looking into the fact that there's 76 volcanoes that are currently erupting. Our polls have moved astronomic. Like they're they're moving faster than they ever have in history. And on top of that we've got the earthquakes everywhere and the fires. We've got earthquakes that are happening at Yellowstone National Park and Santorini which are two of the most massive volcanoes. Like we have the the gases that are 00:31 coming from these different volcanic eruptions that are spreading all over the planet and then on top of that we've also got the solar flares that are hitting the magnetic field of our planet which if it weakens enough can actually cause the the poles to flip. And that's concerning because if you've looked into what happens if that I mean we don't know for sure. It's theoretical. For entertainment purposes only always and forever. Of course. But at Theoretically it wouldn't be good. Who knows? There could be 01:07 like some saving grace. Maybe it won't happen. Maybe it'll just all calm down. But it goes along also with the hopey prophecy. Of the the two brothers or twins flipping and then the weakening and then the the floods and all that that jazz that seems to be And then we've got the airplanes on top of that which could either be maybe from the magnetic field or the solar flares or from the poles shifting. I have no idea. But there's a lot of pl

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Transcript 00:00 Not trying to freak anybody out. I wasn't going to talk about this for a while but is anyone else like looking into the fact that there's 76 volcanoes that are currently erupting. Our polls have moved astronomic. Like they're they're moving faster than they ever have in history. And on top of that we've got the earthquakes everywhere and the fires. We've got earthquakes that are happening at Yellowstone National Park and Santorini which are two of the most massive volcanoes. Like we have the the gases that are 00:31 coming from these different volcanic eruptions that are spreading all over the planet and then on top of that we've also got the solar flares that are hitting the magnetic field of our planet which if it weakens enough can actually cause the the poles to flip. And that's concerning because if you've looked into what happens if that I mean we don't know for sure. It's theoretical. For entertainment purposes only always and forever. Of course. But at Theoretically it wouldn't be good. Who knows? There could be 01:07 like some saving grace. Maybe it won't happen. Maybe it'll just all calm down. But it goes along also with the hopey prophecy. Of the the two brothers or twins flipping and then the weakening and then the the floods and all that that jazz that seems to be And then we've got the airplanes on top of that which could either be maybe from the magnetic field or the solar flares or from the poles shifting. I have no idea. But there's a lot of pl

Jul 28, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: ICE is going to have a bigger budget than the military budget of Russia
False

Fact Check: ICE is going to have a bigger budget than the military budget of Russia

Detailed fact-check analysis of: ICE is going to have a bigger budget than the military budget of Russia

Jul 5, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Is going barefoot better than wearing shoes? | TruthOrFake Blog