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: 32
267
<< 29  30  31    33  34  35 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 21 2017 @ 09:04 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 or 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 knocked 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
edit on 21-2-2017 by AnAbsoluteCreation because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 21 2017 @ 09:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
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?


I don't even know what you're asking.

Speaking of wheels, I am done spinning my wheels with you.

Good bye.

AAC



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

originally posted by: Thenail
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


We are talking about an object that is exposed to the environment with concerns for safety. How do you know the bolts were not galled, corroded, glued, or tack welded into place?
edit on 21-2-2017 by neutronflux because: Fixed that



posted on Feb, 21 2017 @ 09:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Thenail

You think removing those bolts is going to play out like when you change your tire?

The pit crew reference is perfectly valid, because we're to expect some people went out there right in the middle of all that chaos and took down multiple fully erect intact lightpoles by hand. This isn't you fiddling with your bicycle over the course of the weekend. This is serious heavy duty road side construction work. Potentially thousands of witnesses. They'd have but minutes to do every single little detail of that entire scene, including getting in and out with the intact and busted poles.

But keep laughing. Only over a million people have died, literally millions of gallons of blood has spilled, as a direct result of 9/11. And this kind of nonsense keeps us all from getting to the truth that counts, that would save lives. Laugh it up, all of you.




posted on Feb, 21 2017 @ 09:19 PM
link   
a reply to: AnAbsoluteCreation

Sorry, the only way to conclusively prove there are no divots is to provide an overhead photo of the pentagon lawn with the resolution to show divots.

The inability of a camera to deal with shadows, contrast, lack of scale, limited field of view, the inability to see through tall grass/plants/objects, lack of scale, and lack of depth does not make it a certainty divots woukd show up.

You have personally viewed all pentagon lawn photos and swear there are no divot photos?

And how many light poles hit pavement or objects before hitting the ground?

Sorry.



posted on Feb, 21 2017 @ 09:23 PM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

I was laughing at your ignorance of how a nut and bolt works. The way your last post ended I can only assume you have some issues



posted on Feb, 21 2017 @ 09:24 PM
link   
a reply to: AnAbsoluteCreation

I did not say there was no high resolution overhead pictures. I more or less asked you to supply one to support the no divots theory.



posted on Feb, 21 2017 @ 09:41 PM
link   
a reply to: AnAbsoluteCreation

You don't understand? Lame debate technique that shows you have no interest in opposing view points.

Not everything hit wants to fly apart.

It's easier to bend than break most metal. Breaking takes huge amounts of energy. The plane hits a light pole. The light pole is more than happy to bend. The light pole is parallel to the ground. There is a kinck at the base of the bend. The kinck hardens and brittles the metal at the kinck. Making the light pole susceptible to snapping. Most of the energy goes to breaking the metal at the kinck. The pole snaps, and more or less falls straight down.


Or the light poles hit pavement , guard rails, concrete, objects before hitting the lawn.
edit on 21-2-2017 by neutronflux because: (no reason given)

edit on 21-2-2017 by neutronflux because: Sorry was slow to fix this and that



posted on Feb, 21 2017 @ 10:02 PM
link   
Hope I don't eat crow on this one. If the truth movement light pole tool kit doesn't include an overhead photograph of the pentagon lawn to show the toppled light poles with no divots after 15 years, must be a reason?

I still liked the assurance people have seen all the pentagon lawn photos to swear there are no light pole divots. Sarcasm...

Cannot even get a debate over the DNA evidence at the pentagon.



posted on Feb, 21 2017 @ 10:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: AnAbsoluteCreation

I did not say there was no high resolution overhead pictures. I more or less asked you to supply one to support the no divots theory.


Okay, first off. I just looked into the CIT people. Mic drop.

You have no interest in looking into the validity of the red flags of that day. I was suspect before but now I am certain.

And you say I have lame debate technique? (But the way I was post banned for simple insults like that)

You refuse to answer the the big questions, ignore them, then move on to something else. Do you not realize how obvious that is to people?

Why haven't they released any video from that day that wasn't released because of court?

Where is the mark in the ground from the aircraft? We already know from physics that the G force required to pull up at that speed and that altitude to fly level with the ground for over 200 meters before leveling perfectly into the first floor is impossible.

Where are the Seats, cushions, and Luggage of the 150 plus people on plane?

Why was Lloyd England's car set up in two different locations with the same pole for photo ops?

The fact of the matter is that the OS is absolutely destroyed. Period.

What they said happened at the Pentagon that day DID NOT HAPPEN THAT WAY.

And when thousands of Pilots, doctors, engineers, and scientist all join together to question the OS, it is the Government who has the burden of proof to explain themselves.

Why? Because the have all the video footage and they refused to show us.

Mic drop.

AAC



posted on Feb, 21 2017 @ 10:19 PM
link   



Cannot even get a debate over the DNA evidence at the pentagon.


I'll debate you on this.

Show me photo evidence of DNA.

Show me photo evidence of human remains (that were on the airplane) where the DNA came from.

You realize that this DNA point falls flat on people people it is all just hearsay from people that Truthers think are lying to them anyway.

There, I just killed that debate.

Can you answer my questions now?

AAC



posted on Feb, 21 2017 @ 10:21 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Feb, 21 2017 @ 10:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
Hope I don't eat crow on this one. If the truth movement light pole tool kit doesn't include an overhead photograph of the pentagon lawn to show the toppled light poles with no divots after 15 years, must be a reason?



How would there be photo evidence of something that never existed? I've presented photos of the poles on the ground in the area they were erected and there were no divots.

It was you that told me the divots are somewhere else without providing evidence.

You lose this debate on every point you brought up.

AAC



posted on Feb, 21 2017 @ 10:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Thenail

I'm laughing at how you're acting like you have insights to offer by talking like this would be like working on something you'd have out in the shed.

For four nuts to hold those tall poles with lamps and electricity up the torque specs have to be maximal. And they're tucked away inside there with the nuts right in the corners, so no quick external free range access.

Maybe if they had some Bruce Lee types whom can do things like the 1" punch they'd have no problem cranking them badboys loose by hand with the added tension of the lightpoles themselves adding to the math involved.

So yeah laugh it up. 9/11 is no different than UFO's stuff; all good clean fun. Maybe we'll get some new hoaxers on the scene and it'll be an even bigger barrel of laughs.




posted on Feb, 21 2017 @ 10:51 PM
link   
a reply to: everyone

These guys:
www.citizeninvestigationteam.com...
They used to post all their stuff in here. The one guy he was alright I guess. But I've seen some scathing breakdowns of their flyover stuff; etc.

My friend that runs 9/11 Blogger has dealt with them aplenty too and has nothing good to say about their whole scene. But what would he know?



posted on Feb, 21 2017 @ 10:55 PM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss


For four nuts to hold those tall poles with lamps and electricity up the torque specs have to be maximal. And they're tucked away inside there with the nuts right in the corners, so no quick external free range access.


You sir, have no mechanical inclination do you?
Torque specs maximal?
Tucked away inside? It's been pointed out to you there is an access door.
Thenail would have no trouble taking off those four bolts with two wrenches.
You don't have to be superman to do that you know, you gain mechanical advantage with the wrench.
You should really just buy the right sized wrench and go try for yourself, you would be shocked how effective a simple wrench can be.
You want to see some big nuts and bolts, go to a oilfield wellhead they don't use no air impacts to take them off friend.

All that being said, I have no doubt those light standards were hit by a plane.
edit on 21-2-2017 by D8Tee because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 21 2017 @ 11:07 PM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee

We're not talking about the inside of a fridge here. Them being in those corner spots, taking them apart wouldn't play out like using a 4-way to change a tire is the point. If they were externally mounted now sure throw the socket wrench on there, he holds it while one of the other guys slide a long pipe on there to break it loose. 270 degree range of motion wiggle room to bang it out (with maximum chaos happening all around that whole scene).

Instead you'd have about less than 90 degrees range of motion , in an area just slightly larger than the tool itself. Up inside a cavity. Not exactly ideal situation to throw an extra leverage bar on there. Not exactly an ideal space to work where more than one guy can hardly get in there to help the point man. All while the tower is standing straight up with a light on top so added psychological tension, mechanical stress, and DANGER.

And never mind all the many other details and logistics to such a job.

I'd love to see a video of 5 guys running up to such a beast with a socket wrench, a leverage pipe / bar, and whatever crap they could think of to hand carry to help them try to lower the thing to the ground by hand without dropping it, creating a whole noisy scene, and nobody gets hurt... with only a few minutes to pull the whole thing off.


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



posted on Feb, 21 2017 @ 11:32 PM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

I don't even know your position on the poles.
Is it your position that there were taken down and replaced with 'pre damaged' poles to set the scene?

Btw, whats the weight of a lightstandard?
You'd be surprised what happens in the oilpatch when the big iron is moving around.
I don't think it would be beyond reason to say that five righands would have that pole down in very little time.
edit on 21-2-2017 by D8Tee because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 21 2017 @ 11:41 PM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee

That's the implication of anything to do with No Plane at the Pentagon.

Not only was there the problems involved of bringing in the stage prop poles, but also taking down and hauling away the original intact poles. In the chaos; with potentially thousands of witnesses.
edit on 21-2-2017 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 21 2017 @ 11:52 PM
link   
a reply to: AnAbsoluteCreation

Why would I want to see mangled bodies related to families that might want to keep the grisly pictures of their love ones off the internet? Use this link if you want to verify it. I guess it's photos of flight 77 victims submitted as evidence.....

www.siasat.pk...!

You are the one making allegations of a crime!

Prove the survivors among the pentagon staff that saw the passenger remains are lying.

Prove law enforcement and the coroner did not collect passenger remains.

Prove all the coroner documents are fabricated.

Prove all the lab technicians and labs that conducted the DNA analysis are laying.

Prove the crew and passenger remains of flight 77 released for burial are fabricated!



en.m.wikipedia.org...

Charles Burlingame
American pilot

Burlingame was buried in the Arlington National Cemetery. He was initially deemed ineligible for burial there due to his status as a reservist deceased at an age younger than 60, but Burlingame was given a waiver and his case triggered reform of Arlington's burial criteria.[dead link][11




Going to discredit eyewitness, remains recovery, coroner's work, lab work and technicians, and flight 77 victims's funerals?



new topics

top topics



 
267
<< 29  30  31    33  34  35 >>

log in

join