It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Refuting Boeing 757 Theory

page: 1

log in


posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 09:26 PM
I know maybe i shouldn't of made this sorry if you admins are angry...
But i seriously think you should take back your theory!

Refuting The Boeing 757 Theory:

I strongly disagree with ATS theory on the Boeing 757 hitting the Pentagon if this is true i would like to have the following questions answered.
I am not saying what hit the Pentagon was a cruise missile, however i do not believe it was a Boeing 757.

1. What evidence do you have to support the wings of the plane folding in?

2. What about the tail of the plane?, the tail of a Boeing 757 is 44 ft tall.

3. If eye witnesses saw a Boeing 757, how come all of them said different things?
A guy who actually saw the object hit the Pentagon said "It was like....a cruise missile with wings"
There is a big difference between a cruise missile with wings and a Boeing 757.

4. The supposed plane passed over the vehicles of people on the road, how come the witnesses said things like

"it sounded like a missile"

"it sounded as if it were a missile"

"it just went pfft wasn't what i expected from a plane at all"

Assuming it was Boeing 757 passed over the road, the sound should of been deafening, and i think it could of possibly tipped over some of the vehicles on the road, flying that low.

5. You say most of the wreckage was destroyed in a flash fire, if thats true how come the lawn of the Pentagon isn't burnt?
If there was a flash fire that melted the plane surely it would of done something to the lawn.

6. You say a Boeing 757, made the punch out hole at the Pentagon, i find this very hard to believe, if thats true there would be sufficient wreckage either side of the punch out hole, however i see very little.
In that case i could easily conclude there wouldn't of been enough wreckage travelling at what ever speed to create that punch out hole.

7. Yes there were eye witnesses, to my knowledge not many of them even said it was a Boeing 757 they saw, and how could one possibly tell when its travelling at 500 MPH ?
You should note, that because they were told they saw a plane, it is actually very likely that image was created in there head, if you think that is crazy, get a bunch of 50 people, pass something by them very quickly or flash them something, then tell them its something it isn't, i bet most of them even though they saw something different will create a differnt image in there heads.

8. Have any of you seen 9/11
ainful Deceptions?

9. The video of the object hitting the Pentagon seems to be smaller than a Boeing 757, and has a white trail of dust behind it.
The guys at the Pentagon say the video is real, im sure some one could easily prove that the object in the video IS NOT a Boeing 757.
The Pentagon video also shows a bright red firewall, bright red firewalls are characteristic of explosives, not a kerosene based fire.
The fireball on the video at it's largest, i would estimate to be 200 feet tall, the rapid expansion of the fireball and size should prove the fireball was caused by explosives.

10. Why not actually release the videos?
Sorry i don't buy "because it will upset the families", and i really hope you don't actually believe thats the reason they are hiding the footage they have.

11. If the wings folded in...what about the tail, i assume the tail would be at least 50 ft across....

12. How the hell would a Boeing 757, that is tracked on radar, manage to actually make it to the Pentagon, assuming it was a Boeing 757 that hit the Pentagon, we all know now the american air defence is totally useless...or at least it was on 9/11 for some strange reason.

I suggest you have another debate on this, what your saying is not just wrong, but it's encouraging people to actually think that flight school flunkies with box cutters carried out 9/11.
I have investigated 9/11 probably more than anyone else in the world (except Phil Jayhan)
well...maybe that an exagerration...but i have investigated a lot.
I suggest you guys should head over to
Have a talk on the forums, take a look at the research we are doing.
I can assure you, 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB!

posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 09:31 PM
Nothing wrong with your post but you should seriously try searching through the list of Pentagon threads ( Click here for list ) and other threads that deal with 9/11. There has to be at least a dozen threads that deal with this exact same theory.

I guess what I'm trying to say is it would be best to post this in one of the previous threads.

[edit on 13-1-2005 by dbates]

posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 09:33 PM
Okay....all those points aside...what happened to the people that fly on the flight they say crashed into the Pentagon? And what happened to the actual 757 they said crashed if there "never was one"?

new topics

log in