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.
When the plane collides with the wall it should have made a hole for the engines on both sides?
Are you stupid?
And exit hole with no plane wreckage.
Well if the engines broke why we not find parts?
as someone asked you before which you didn't answer but seeing as you are asking I think you really do expect there be a paper cut out of plane entering the pentagon.
originally posted by: InhaleExhale
a reply to: Jacobu12
When the plane collides with the wall it should have made a hole for the engines on both sides?
as someone asked you before which you didn't answer but seeing as you are asking I think you really do expect there be a paper cut out of plane entering the pentagon.
Let me ask you what you so nicely ask others
Are you stupid?
It certainly looks that way, everything you post displays pure ignorance or some wicked trolling.
And exit hole with no plane wreckage.
Yes, stupid is a clear definition of what you are doing.
Why?
you actually posted a photo of the exit hole with wreckage and so did Zaphod, you claimed it was bigger or smaller when it was clearly the same size and the same exit hole.
Well if the engines broke why we not find parts?
what, you mean like the parts that you were arguing weren't part of an airplane engine and then shown over and over again it is.
You are another one on here who has not researched, the evidence.
Before the roof caved in, pictures of the damage got taken, and we can see 4 maybe 5 column struts are broken. Meaning whatever hit that building was not the American airlines plane with a 125 feet wing span. Government says 8 total columns got destroyed.
I posted a picture of the exit hole just after the attack on the Pentagon, big difference. Zaphod posted a picture of the exit hole when workers got to the scene and started clearing up. Did you miss the part where i pointed it out to him, the wall was marked in orange. The wall was later enlarged when the workers came on scene, you find pictures of that online.
The original hole does not show plane parts at all
originally posted by: InhaleExhale
a reply to: Jacobu12
You are another one on here who has not researched, the evidence.
Well since you wrote it, your type of research, yes, I have done NO research that resembles your version of research.
Before the roof caved in, pictures of the damage got taken, and we can see 4 maybe 5 column struts are broken. Meaning whatever hit that building was not the American airlines plane with a 125 feet wing span. Government says 8 total columns got destroyed.
I have said now at least 2 times, you don't understand what kinetic energy is, its no wonder you say such things when you don't understand what you talking about.
I posted a picture of the exit hole just after the attack on the Pentagon, big difference. Zaphod posted a picture of the exit hole when workers got to the scene and started clearing up. Did you miss the part where i pointed it out to him, the wall was marked in orange. The wall was later enlarged when the workers came on scene, you find pictures of that online.
No I didn't miss anything.
The 2 pics show the exact same size hole.
If you cant see that then its OK because you can actually use both pictures work and out a scale and measure the hols in both pics to find........
wait for it.....
that both are the same size.
The original hole does not show plane parts at all
Both show the same wreckage and one can make out a few part of plane wreckage as was pointed out in the photos.
originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Jacobu12
You mean we never answer anything that you want to hear.
originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Jacobu12
Except for the really minor fact that once you got out past the fuselage, most of the plane wasn't going to punch through the wall. You weren't going to get a cartoon cutout of a plane on the wall.
The engines weren't going to go through the wall because they are actually quite small behind the fan section. And despite a few parts being titanium and steel (a very few parts) they'll come apart in a heartbeat. Every engine I ever saw, unless it was brand new or freshly overhauled had bent fan blades (which are a titanium mix) from small pebbles, ice, or something going through them.
originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Jacobu12
Read what I actually said, as opposed to your interpretation of what I said.
most of the plane wasn't going to punch through the wall.
That didn't say a damn thing about them not hitting the wall, now did it.
originally posted by: Jacobu12
originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: Jacobu12
Non-pilots cannot appreciate the other factor in the equation, ground effect. Hani The Magnificent was 90knots or move over Vne, and in ground effect, and if he had been just a few feet off he would have missed the building completely.
It's a ridiculous story told about Hani The Magnificent, but humans and especially Americans today love to engage in a willing suspension of disbelief, as long as their government tells them to, time after time after time. For some, endless repetition of a falsehood will have them believe the falsehood.
An object crashed at the Pentagon we know that for sure.. Lets not forget about the security camera footage released. Why did they remove the timestamp and date of the video? This would show the time of the attack to the minute?
originally posted by: MrBig2430
originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: Jacobu12
And so, it means Hani The Magnificent had to be flying as close to the ground as if he were taxiing, in ground effect, at Vmo +90 and that's ridiculous.
Yeah that's nuts.
Fly like that and you're gonna crash.
Oh, wait.....
originally posted by: Salander
originally posted by: Jacobu12
originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: Jacobu12
Non-pilots cannot appreciate the other factor in the equation, ground effect. Hani The Magnificent was 90knots or move over Vne, and in ground effect, and if he had been just a few feet off he would have missed the building completely.
It's a ridiculous story told about Hani The Magnificent, but humans and especially Americans today love to engage in a willing suspension of disbelief, as long as their government tells them to, time after time after time. For some, endless repetition of a falsehood will have them believe the falsehood.
An object crashed at the Pentagon we know that for sure.. Lets not forget about the security camera footage released. Why did they remove the timestamp and date of the video? This would show the time of the attack to the minute?
They removed the time stamp (I don't know that, but will take your word for it) so that people would be deceived. Everything they do is to deceive the people and prop up a nonsense story.