It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

9/11 TRUTH GOES NUCLEAR: Massive Download In Progress . . . It’s Time to Wake Up!

page: 15
77
<< 12  13  14    16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 6 2014 @ 05:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Salander

Common sense, sir.


The only way for you to have common sense about what to expect when the plane hit the Pentagon is if you'd witnessed and/or examined similar situations before. You haven't, therefore we can nullify your appeal to "common sense" as baseless.


The story was that a 757 crashed there.


It's not a story. There's multiple lines of evidence that converge on this fact.


The debris present, all the damage present was not consistent with a 757.


Funny thing, links were provided to aerospaceweb that says that there are parts that ARE consistent with a 757. SO why should anyone believe you when the best you've got is an appeal to your own "common sense", and absolutely zero third party statements about it?


Common sense demands that if somebody claims it was a duck, but the remains look like a pig, then it cannot be a duck.

Get it?


Yep. I've got it.

We've got your uninformed opinion on things that says it's a duck and a pig vs an informed examination of the evidence that says yep, it's a duck and a duck.

I know whose opinion the smart people will give more weight to...




posted on Dec, 8 2014 @ 03:14 PM
link   
a reply to: lexyghot

Your links did not prove a thing.

The articles linked to were a discussion of the technical aspects of various engines and other components in use today. Not once did those articles offer any claim or documentation that the writer had personally examined the physical evidence. Just like mine or yours, they merely offer a general analysis of what he had seen in pictures, and he took great liberties with his claims.

They proved nothing, and you are unable to explain why in heck there were no 757 landing gear assemblies visible. You are missing those, you're missing the massive engines, and you're missing quite a few wheels and wheel trucks.



posted on Dec, 8 2014 @ 03:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Salander

No, you have been shown photos of 757 assemblies that were found in the Pentagon. You just refuse to accept reality.



posted on Dec, 8 2014 @ 03:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Salander

Here, watch this. It is a landing gear extention/retraction test on a 757. Pay particular note to the size of the landing gear as compared to the men. A 757's landing gear is nowhere NEAR as "massive" as you think.

www.youtube.com...



posted on Dec, 8 2014 @ 03:40 PM
link   
Weak, cardinalfan, pathetically weak.



posted on Dec, 8 2014 @ 03:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Salander
Have you watched the video to see how wrong you are about the size of a 757's landing gear?



posted on Dec, 8 2014 @ 03:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Salander
Weak, cardinalfan, pathetically weak.


So it is weak because it once again destroys your silly claims....



posted on Dec, 8 2014 @ 04:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Salander

Massive engines? Really? Go take the cowling off one of those "massive" engines.



That whole outer portion is nothing but fan blades. The actual engine is that small portion in the center. There are components mounted on the outer part, but all it is with regards to the engine itself is fan.



posted on Dec, 8 2014 @ 04:07 PM
link   
As for the landing gear, the rim found matches the holes perfectly to one of the two wheel rims used on a 757, as well as the size of the rim matching.
edit on 12/8/2014 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 09:04 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Yeah, too bad they couldn't "find" the other 8 or 9 wheels that make up the landing gear.




posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 09:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Salander Who says they did not find them? But, we will note that you are moving the goalposts. First, you said that the landing gear was massive and taller than a man, since you have been shown that it is not, and that the pictures at the Pentagon clearly show a hub belonging to a 757.....now you plant your flag on "Well, they did not find the rest of them."


edit on 9-12-2014 by cardinalfan0596 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 09:18 AM
link   
a reply to: Salander

They only showed one. That doesn't mean they didn't find them all or even most of them. They were not obligated to release every single piece of debris to satisfy your curiosity.



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 11:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: Zaphod58

Yeah, too bad they couldn't "find" the other 8 or 9 wheels that make up the landing gear.



2 more wheels including brakes can be seen in this photo.




posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 12:16 PM
link   
But wait!
You have shown him the correct size of the gears.
You have shown him pictures of several gears in the debris.

But you didn't show his the serial numbers!
Without pictures of the serial numbers plastered all over the internet it MUST be a government conspiracy!



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 05:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Salander

Yeah, too bad they couldn't "find" the other 8 or 9 wheels that make up the landing gear.



Another Pentagon / Boeing 757 tyre, rim and brake, I forgot I had.


edit on 9-12-2014 by waypastvne because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 11 2014 @ 08:02 AM
link   
Gentlemen

Judging by the pictures shown to the public, IN CONTEXT, there were no wheels or wheel trucks or landing gear assemblies that resemble a 757.

One wheel does not a 757 assembly make, if you understand what I mean.

That some posters here might have access to some "special pictures" does not change the pictures that we the public were shown in 2001.

In context, the wheel shown, the pictures shown, were very much short of the required number present on a 757.



posted on Dec, 11 2014 @ 09:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Salander

Every crash ever has resulted in parts not being found. Does that make them faked?



posted on Dec, 11 2014 @ 10:11 AM
link   
a reply to: Salander

There is no 'context'. You first claimed that the picture of the rim was too small to be a 757's because a 757's landing gear was "too massive" "taller than a man". You were shown a video of an intact 757 and its landing gear proving you were wrong, then you complained that you had only seen one wheel....Then you were shown pictures of several OTHER wheels that were found and you are complaining that there wasn't enough of them.

I have a feeling that if we DID find a photographer that had been standing in the Helipad Control Tower at the Pentagon and had an autoframe camera that captured a few hundred frames of Flight 77 streaking towards the wall you would complain that you could not see "American Airlines" on it....



posted on Dec, 11 2014 @ 03:55 PM
link   


I have a feeling that if we DID find a photographer that had been standing in the Helipad Control Tower at the Pentagon and had an autoframe camera that captured a few hundred frames of Flight 77 streaking towards the wall you would complain that you could not see "American Airlines" on it....

It's called moving the goal post.
Conspiracy believers do it all the time.



posted on Dec, 11 2014 @ 04:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: samkent
It's called moving the goal post.
Conspiracy believers do it all the time.

Well, it is the only way they can justify in their own mind their silly conspiracy theory, if they accepted the facts they would have to accept that it is just a silly made up story they believe in..



new topics

top topics



 
77
<< 12  13  14    16 >>

log in

join