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.


The Mystery of the WTC Flashes

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Dec, 7 2005 @ 04:09 PM


From a commercial airliner?

You're kidding, right? Since when has ANY commercial airliner been equipped with missile-firing capabilities?

Or am I really that ignorant?

posted on Dec, 7 2005 @ 10:08 PM
Maybe...maybe not. Since when has anything like 9/11 ever happened? Just a thought.

posted on Dec, 7 2005 @ 10:58 PM
HowardRoark the first plane flash happens before the plane impacts the building, look for a decent video and you will see. It is a fact now so you don't have to worry about it, the math has been done.

Having missiles is nothing strange, they have been used to guide planes before. It would serve two purposes, 1.) Guide the plane 2.) Ignite the fuel quickly for nice fireworks.

posted on Dec, 8 2005 @ 01:04 AM
Welp.. I'm new here, but since i'm in the military the 9/11 tradegy is near and dear to my heart. But i'd like to say hello to all of you.

First off.. I believe the static therory but have somthin to add. Airliners.. well all aircraft create static electricity. Thats why a lot of em have static dischargers that take the static from the fuselage and send it out through these lil rods so to speak. I can get you a detailed picture of the ones on the F16. But anyways....The WTC being soooo tall would also have these rods, on a much bigger scale mind you.. So put these both together and you could have the potential for a LOT of static right? Now lookin at the pictures it makes sense to me that the plane was dumping fuel. Somthin that they can do if there goin to land too heavy or somthing. The terrorists could and would dump the fuel for a bigger exsplosion. The exsplosion we see in the pictures could be a fuel exsplosion?

Just my thoughts.....

posted on Dec, 8 2005 @ 04:36 AM
i can clearly see the pod and flashes and whatnot, but let's apply some reasonable doubt pls.

there's even a website claiming these planes were holographic projections... which would be several orders of magnitudes more complicated than just flying a plane into the tower, wouldn't it? their explanation involves orbs, hmm

orbs ?!?!?

so, my take on these ultra-strange alienesque theories is that tinkering with images is a lot easier when it's done months later...

PS: after having magnified coarse-grained blurry pictures, i suggest somebody more knowledgeable than me investigates the visual footprint of an active aircraft radar being slammed into a structure comparable to WTC'1&2's facade.

posted on Dec, 9 2005 @ 04:43 PM
Airliners also have their main weather radar located in the nose. The radome covers a flat panel radar array with a huge amount of electricity running through it. The flash that occurs as the nose of the plane begins to crumple is likely the radar dish going pyrotechnic (just like kicking in the tube on a TV set while it's still turned on). The aluminum frame of the airliner ends a few feet short of the nose of the plane, the rest of it is fiberglass.

767 with open radome:

posted on Dec, 16 2005 @ 01:39 PM

Originally posted by SZamboni
The aluminum frame of the airliner ends a few feet short of the nose of the plane, the rest of it is fiberglass.

As evident from the unfortunate accident at Midway the other day.

posted on Dec, 18 2005 @ 02:13 PM
someone really needs to explain this missile idea properly. i dont understand it.
what sort of missile is it supposed to fire and when?
i dont see one at all.

posted on Dec, 18 2005 @ 03:08 PM
I can't believe that the most obvious option has been left out. Reflected sunshine between the plane and the windows. The reflection would no be seen on the wings because the angle is too great but the body of the plane is round enough, along with the windshield to reflect sunlight back and forth between the windows and the plane causing a flash like a camera flash. The body is also quite smooth to reduce wind resistance and if painted with anything other than a matte finish paint it should reflect light. The turbulent air could distort the flash and make it seem like a ball or other shape like in clouds and weather fronts.

The static electric discharge is also a good theory.

posted on Dec, 18 2005 @ 03:11 PM
Maybe the missles were used as a way to weaken the buildings,so they would collapse sooner???...ive herd that the plane impacts alone, couldnt have brung the towers down..whatever the case may be,i dont think this topic is of much importance anymore

posted on Sep, 7 2008 @ 11:11 PM
reply to post by Musclor

These Jet Fuels have a very high ignition Temperature, so there was no guarantee that the fuel would be ignited to produce the big fireball at crash. The flash was a for the detonation of the jet fuel as the fuel tanks broke up. I thought of this months ago, but never put my hypothesis on the internet until now.

Does this sound like a reasonable explanation?

As a Chemist, I looked up the properties of Jet Fuel & discovered this information about Kerosene and other types of Jet Fuel. Potentially there could have been no fires unless the fuel was detonated, insuring the temperature required to set the fireball off.

I am a retired Physics & Chemistry Instructor. My name is Chuck Boldwyn

posted on Sep, 8 2008 @ 12:10 AM
I find it strange that the flash comes from the so called
"Debunked" pod like object... hhhhhhhhmmmmmmm

new topics

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in