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.

 

The strangest Coincidence regarding the Pentagon attack on 9/11

page: 31
267
<< 28  29  30    32  33  34 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 21 2017 @ 07:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: D8Tee
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

There's really no need for an air impact truth be known. Coming from working on the oil rigs anything an air impact can do you can do with a socket wrench, and it's not that much slower.


What size hardware? Small 1-1/2 bolts? Wrenches are bulky, over 12" long, and relatively heavy. The light pole being in the way will make it hard to work a wrench. What if the bolt is galled, glued, or tack welded in place. If the light pole is held in place with studs, then you may need to lift the light pole off the studs. Or cut them with a grinder. And that is if some secondary safer device isn't anchoring the light pole. And you still need to get a hydraulic jawed pipe cutter to snap the poles to simulate a crash.



Well, personally I think a plane hit the poles.
Just saying all this talk of needing an air impact to take off the bolts is BS.
If you are handy with wrenches it takes no time to spin off the big 1 7/8 nuts on a well head and I can almost guarantee you they will be in worse condition and bigger than any light standard bolts.
Again, if you've never spun wrenches for a living, you will have no clue as to what is being described.




posted on Feb, 21 2017 @ 07:41 PM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee

Pretty sure the bolts to light poles are at least locktight in to place. And that is not counting galling or corrosion impeding nut removal.



posted on Feb, 21 2017 @ 07:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: D8Tee

Pretty sure the bolts to light poles are at least locktight in to place. And that is not counting galling or corrosion impeding nut removal.


Personally I doubt they use loctite, even if they did, a wrench with a persuader bar on it would turn it off.
Doesn't matter if they are galled or corroded.
My point is, anything that can be undone with an air impact can be undone with a wrench and not much slower either.
Again, I doubt you have any familiarity with wrenches.
edit on 21-2-2017 by D8Tee because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 21 2017 @ 07:55 PM
link   
Okay, so it wouldn't be the same air tool I was envisioning last night. I had the bolt design of a different base in my minds eye.


www.valmontstructures.com...
Breakaway Transformer Base Aluminum M093 TB1-17

But unless someone can find video of NASCAR pit crew using wrenches / rachets to change their quick release lugs, I'll be sticking with power tools would be the way such a rapid fire job would have to be pulled off. The torque settings on those must be immense, and I'm picturing thick lock washers to boot.

If I still lived in the city I'd be able to walk right up to one of these in a matter of couple minutes, but alas I do not.
edit on 21-2-2017 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 21 2017 @ 08:00 PM
link   
a reply to: AnAbsoluteCreation

You showed photos that I've already posted, and then one shot of the car. Not in the mood to play CIT videos. But I've seen all this stuff before... ages ago.
edit on 21-2-2017 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 21 2017 @ 08:02 PM
link   
a reply to: AnAbsoluteCreation

Just showing some hand picked photos does not prove there is no damage to the turf. You provide no context, what is the source of the photos, no camera angle, the events that transpired between photos, the sequence number of the photos, and no reference to total photos taken.

Thanks for providing a biased selection of photos with no context of evidence or how they correlate on a time line. Nor do you make an honest effort to cite the sources of the photos and how many other photos you chose to omit.

Your photo evidence has no context nor meaning as evidence. No account of the events between your photos.

Nor do you provide a chain of events how the light pole ended up on the taxi.

Did the light pole just smack down on top vs the light pole bounced up and then came to rest on the taxi.

You just think the damage is wrong?



posted on Feb, 21 2017 @ 08:07 PM
link   
a reply to: AnAbsoluteCreation

Are you saying they wouldn't move the taxi if it was in the way of emergency vehicles? If it was a safety concern?

The only way the taxi moved was do to a staged event? Disjointed logic! The light pole damaged the engine so the car would not run, or the car couldn't be towed?

The taxi is the only car that moved after the crash at the pentagon?



posted on Feb, 21 2017 @ 08:09 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

Again, the photos of the poles in the grass indicate where they fell. If you don't want to believe that the picture should reflect where they landed, then show me the divots in the ground where you think they landed. See how that works? You can't play both sides.

Are you not going to answer the question about Lloyd England's car being in two photo op locations? I get it, that's a tough one. But give it a shot.


AAC



posted on Feb, 21 2017 @ 08:09 PM
link   
a reply to: firerescue

so in other words, you were totally wrong about what you said and spoke too soon.

then when i pointed that out to you, you had to defer to the pentagon report which didn't clarify anything you initially stated.

this is not good logic, and does not make for a solid argument.

and.. you're shooting yourself in the foot with your own source.



Pentagon Crash Sim



reconcile these two pieces of information for me - i bet you won't be able to.

if this plane "dove" from 2,200 feet to a point where it was only a few feet off the ground, THEN started flying straight ahead as the pentagon report shows *several times*, how long was it flying a mere few feet off the ground for?

how do you reconcile these two stated facts from the OS? how far did this plane travel only a mere few feet off the ground at 500+mph after descending from 2,200 feet? a city block? two blocks?

what kind of aviation mechanics can you refer me to in order to explain this gaping hole in the OS's reasoning?

this should be good. can't wait for your response.

EDIT:

for added emphasis. i'd love to see you explain this away. the stage is yours.


edit on 21-2-2017 by facedye because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 21 2017 @ 08:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: AnAbsoluteCreation

Are you saying they wouldn't move the taxi if it was in the way of emergency vehicles? If it was a safety concern?

The only way the taxi moved was do to a staged event? Disjointed logic! The light pole damaged the engine so the car would not run, or the car couldn't be towed?

The taxi is the only car that moved after the crash at the pentagon?


hahaha Really? You're taking the position that Lloyd England, who claimed vehemently that his car was not in two locations until shown pictures, had his car moved because of emergency vehicles coming through?

You obvious are not privy to how investigations work. But your assertion is silly anyway because in both picture that pole was in front of his car.
'
A swing and a miss on that try. Try again.

AAC



posted on Feb, 21 2017 @ 08:13 PM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

You don't get it, and you won't get it, you're intent on insisting that only a air impact can take off those stupid nuts, thats just ridiculous. Anyways, since you've never made a living with the big iron spinning a wrenches we'll leave it at that. You think you need an air impact, I know you don't.

btw I don't recall posting any photos in this thread.
edit on 21-2-2017 by D8Tee because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 21 2017 @ 08:20 PM
link   
I agree absolutely, 100%. I never bought that there was absolutely no video footage of the plane crash, other than the heavily doctored surveillance footage from that neighboring business. And even that was not able to prove it was a jet, it looked more like a missile with short wings. But I wondered where the jet disappeared to.
Now with the Flight MH370 cover up over the Indian Ocean a few years back, I wonder if it didn't just go to a military hanger or turn off its transponder and get dumped in the Atlantic Ocean.



posted on Feb, 21 2017 @ 08:21 PM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee

Oh, that was supposed to go to the OP.


Sure, it can be done without a noisy impact. But to do it without one only adds to the absurdity of construction dudes out there right in the middle of the chaos down with their hands cramped inside them aluminum break away boxes trying to turn them with a ratchet. Several of them. Without a crane. Simultaneously. Without disturbing the grass. While scattering glass and debris all about. And then loading them on a LONG trailer and driving off with them. Not one single witness.


edit on 21-2-2017 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 21 2017 @ 08:25 PM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Like I said, I believe the poles were hit by a plane.

My argument was that anything a air impact can do, a socket wrench or even plain wrench can do, and that is a fact.



posted on Feb, 21 2017 @ 08:41 PM
link   
a reply to: AnAbsoluteCreation

This is why I always loved ATS. Wish we got back to our roots and had more of this. Kudos, great job.



posted on Feb, 21 2017 @ 08:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: AnAbsoluteCreation
a reply to: neutronflux

Again, the photos of the poles in the grass indicate where they fell. If you don't want to believe that the picture should reflect where they landed, then show me the divots in the ground where you think they landed. See how that works? You can't play both sides.

Are you not going to answer the question about Lloyd England's car being in two photo op locations? I get it, that's a tough one. But give it a shot.


AAC


Photos are the representation of a 3-d world in two 2-d. Photos are at the mercy of shadow, contrast, field of view, and no depth.

You showed photos only with a small field of view with a camera more parallel to the ground than not. It is a 36O degree world. Tall obects and plants could obscure marks in the ground. Also, a pole could have bounced to make a divot to what would be from behind the photographer to come to land with no divot action to what is in the front of the photographer. (The photographer was not there when the light pole came to its position.)

Sorry, but this is a true statement. "The only way you could prove there was no divots would be from an overhead photo with enough resolution to show divots."

Do you have a 360 degree photo taken from each light pole? But again, the camera would be more parallel to the ground than not. Tall objects and plants would obscure marks in the ground.

And did all light poles hit grass, or did some hit pavement.
edit on 21-2-2017 by neutronflux because: Fixed from



posted on Feb, 21 2017 @ 08:52 PM
link   
a reply to: AnAbsoluteCreation

The car had good wheels? The only reason it could move was do to a staged event?

Can you provide the photos with time stamps and cite the photographer to back his account? What would the photographer's account of the events be?



posted on Feb, 21 2017 @ 08:57 PM
link   
a reply to: [post=21927736]IgnoranceIsntBlisss[/post

Loosening a bolt only takes a wrench and a minute. You don't need a pit crew from the indy 500 to do it . I had to laugh when I read your comment about reaching your hand inside the cover to tighten the bolts down. The cover slides up and down . Why would they give you a 3" by 3" area to try to turn a wrench in



posted on Feb, 21 2017 @ 09:03 PM
link   
a reply to: AnAbsoluteCreation

You have Lloyd, no photos with context nor time line, corresponding account from the photographer, and the Lloyd account was obtained by a biased group CIT.

VS

Numerous eyewitness accounts of a passenger jet hitting the pentagon.

Documented passenger jet wreckage on the lawn right on the onset of Flight 77 crashing at the pentagon.

Documented passenger jet wreckage in the pentagon.

The crash site held the remains and DNA of the passengers and crew of flight 77.

A pilot that gave a real time account by radio of a silver passenger jet hitting the pentagon.

Pentagon eyewitness calling CIT out on their Lloyd account.

Radar, FAA, and flight recorder data that backs the physical evidence.

edit on 21-2-2017 by neutronflux because: Fixed this and that.



posted on Feb, 21 2017 @ 09:03 PM
link   





Photos are the representation of a 3-d world in two 2-d. Photos are at the mercy of shadow, contrast, field of view, and no depth.


No clue what you're talking about. Seems like your drafting a point of obfuscating.



You showed photos only with a small field of view with a camera more parallel to the ground than not. It is a 36O degree world. Tall obects and plants could obscure marks in the ground. Also, a pole could have bounced to make a divot to what would be from behind the photographer to come to land with no divot action to what is in the front of the photographer. (The photographer was not there when the light pole came to its position.)


There are hundreds of photos from that day around those poles. Not one divot anywhere. Again, you're arguing that since all the pictures of the poles don't show any divots, then those poles must've not been locked down there. That's like me saying, there's no landing gear outside the 12 foot punch out wall, so then that punch out wall was not made by any landing gear. You are literally doing what you refuse to allow the Truthers to do.


Sorry, but this is a true statement. "The only way you could prove there was no divots would be from an overhead photo with enough resolution to show divots."


That is an outrage assertion. There are hundreds of high res pictures of that area and nothing shows a divot.


Do you have a 360 degree photo taken from each light pole? But again, the camera would be more parallel to the ground than not. Tall objects and plants would obscure marks in the ground.

And did all light poles hit grass, or did some hit pavement.


I am super happy you brought that up. Can I now ask you why all the video footage that could put this story to rest is still classified?

AAC



new topics

top topics



 
267
<< 28  29  30    32  33  34 >>

log in

join