Originally posted by Zaphod58
Apples and Oranges. The plane that they were flying was a small executive jet. The plane that hit the Pentagon was many tons heavier. That was a Gulfstream II VIP plane. Here's a little comparison between the two.

G-II
Empty weight 17235 kg
Takeoff weight 26080 kg / 65,500 lbs

757
Maximum Zero Fuel Weight Between 184,000 pounds and 200,000 pounds depending on configuration. (83,450kg-90,700kh)
Maximum Takeoff: 272,500 lb (123,600 kg)

That's cool. Still doesn't explain a light pole that looks like it went through a conduit bender.

The cab was moved and his account still doesn't make sense.

you would think that if a plane that big hit a lightpole at such speed that it might have made a dent in the pole

Hence the nice little curve in it.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Hence the nice little curve in it.

well, theres a big difference between a big dent and a nice curve in a hollow metal tube - ive seen a few lampposts knocked down by cars travelling at speed before and they all were caved in where they were hit with scratch marks all over the place

They were also hit a lot lower than this one was. When a car hits a pole, it's hitting the portion of the pole where all the support is the strongest. If you were to hit it higher up, it would tend to bend before snapping off the base.

This article is just the kind of useless investigation that the ATS owners love to promote, it is also the very same type of non-investigation that was evident in the Catherder piece - a bunch of nonsense that was heartily endorsed by the ATS owners. I find it interesting therefore, yet not at all surprising, that the owners of the ATS forum have decided to give this article it's own thread. dn:

Flip:

[edit on 18-1-2006 by Flipflopper]

[edit on 18-1-2006 by Flipflopper]

Flipping Flops

There is a very large difference between an "endorsement" and promoting an interesting thread.

We'd be pleased to promote any interesting thread you might have.



damned if we do... damned if we don't.


-


Posted Via ATSmobile (BETA v0.3)


-

Warning Will Robinson - Danger!! - Possible COINTELPRO Activity

Originally posted by Flipflopper
This article is just the kind of useless investigation that the ATS owners love to promote, it is also the very same type of non-investigation that was evident in the Catherder piece - a bunch of nonsense that was heartily endorsed by the ATS owners. I find it interesting therefore, yet not at all surprising, that the owners of the ATS forum have decided to give this article it's own thread. dn:

Flip:

The above member is posting under two different names on this board, and now has been in two separate threads that attempt to discuss alternative theories to the 9/11 events and in both cases has posted in a manner that deflects from the attempted discussion while at the same time attacking ATS for its attempts at perserving the right to discuss these topics.

According to some internet sources who present themselves as experts in this area, this behavior could be deemed psychopathic, and could be possibly be the activity of a COINTELPRO agent.

I thought it best to warn the posters of this thread about this, so they could have the fuller picture.


[edit on 1-18-2006 by Valhall]

You have voted Merc_the_Perp for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month.

OUTSTANDING!

You won't ever win, if Merc had stayed banned then you would be silencing people trying to speak out and obviously connected to government.
So even though you made an exception and allowed him/her straight back so he/she could continue with their discussion, you are still connected to Government?
It's that sort of weird, paranoid, freaky and down right illogical behaviour that gets my back up so much these days and why I'm so hostile.
Ironically, it's since I've come up against people like that I've started to support elements of the official line more. Way to go...
*shakes head*

Originally posted by Valhall

Warning Will Robinson - Danger!! - Possible COINTELPRO Activity

The above member is posting under two different names on this board, and now has been in two separate threads that attempt to discuss alternative theories to the 9/11 events and in both cases has posted in a manner that deflects from the attempted discussion while at the same time attacking ATS for its attempts
at perserving the right to discuss these topics.

i LOVE THIS WEB SITE!

WHAT DRAMA, MYSTERY, INTRIGUE!

FASCINATING!

By the way I have noticed obvious agendas being pushed by other members as well Valhall.

[edit on 1/18/2006 by theBLESSINGofVISION]

Frankly, I'm not convinced. Especially by all the assumptions being made all over the piece. So what if there ara lot of Government/media people being quoted? We're talking about Washington here, near the Pentagon! And the mention of the cab being moved is rather pointless. Sorry to say that it's making a mountain out of a molehill.

[edit on 18-1-2006 by Darkmind]

Originally posted by theBLESSINGofVISION
By the way I have noticed obvious agendas being pushed by other members as well Valhall.

Of late, the most aggressive "agenda pushers" seem to be those who either have a vested interest in, or are heavy supporters of "conspiracy profiteers". We define this group as those who have produced a website, book, video, viral campaign, or other item focusing on one rather narrow view of a conspiracy theory. Many of these people have come here to ATS in the past three years with a very "in your face" style as they attempt to discredit any theory that contradicts with their for-profit theories. They simply can't abide free and open discussion on these issues while they're attempting to profit form one narrow interpretation.

And of course, if someone is attempting to disrupt any discussion of a conspiracy theory... naturally, we triangulate our BS detectors and examine why.

Originally posted by SkepticOverlordconspiracy profiteers". We define this group as those who have produced a website, book, video, viral campaign, or other item focusing on one rather narrow view of a conspiracy theory.

tv show included there? nsert smirking smiley here>

sorry, couldn't resist.

Originally posted by Crakeur
tv show included there? nsert smirking smiley here>

Huh?

What does our TV show have to do with it?

Originally posted by Crakeur


tv show included there? nsert smirking smiley here>

sorry, couldn't resist.

LOL - your humor wasn't lost to me. The difference would be that ATS TV will be open to all the topics/theories/viewpoints of our members - not one narrowly defined theory. What SO was referring to were "groups" that have promoted a single theory, and then engage in less than ethical activities to try to shut down alternative theories to their own.

just a joke SO and thankfully, someone saw the humor in it.

val, I know the difference, just pointing out the humor in the comment.

now back to how a falling chunk of light post can damage a windshield and not the whole car - for those that have issue tying their shoes, let me point out that the piece of light post that is on the ground is just that - a piece. quite possible that the piece broke off the post and just that curved piece fell into the windshield.

Originally posted by HowardRoark
Actually, the pole was bent by the impact with the plane.

The light was on a separate arm

you can see it behind the cab in this shot.


Here is another example of the distortion caused by the foreshortening effect.

compare the curve of the post in this photo:

with the exaggerated curve in this photo:

[edit on 17-1-2006 by HowardRoark]

[edit on 17-1-2006 by HowardRoark]

Ok people, lets get smart here, shall we. The pole didnt bend at all. THE POLE DIDNT BEND AT ALL. The light pole, which is naturally bent from the forming and architectural design, was SHEARED off by impact. The bolts you are seeing above attach the curved light pole to the top of the straight pole. There are two visual sources of shear failure, one is the base of the curved pole and the other is where the wing sliced through the pole before the light. Both are clearly visable in the above photo. My theory is that while he was traveling at least 45 mph the part that smashed his window was probably the smaller light piece end which punctured the glass, seem logical to any other people? It seems the damage correlates to the size of the smashed off piece.

Again, when structures are placed under extremely fast loading conditions, they fail in shear, as flexural failure does not have time to develop.

Train

This thread is one that I read over and over again because something bothers me about this whole thing. I know that the car and the light post are the topic of most of you in here. BUT, reread the postings of the angles and the distruction path the plane left behind.
A couple questions come to mind.

1. In the photos of the Pentagon burning there are pictures of other light posts that haven't been touched and they are closer to the explosion than an other structure besides the generator. Why are these poles affected?
2. With jet fuel you get a hug explosion and a fire ball and debre that falls out right? Then why in one picture is the tree not touched at all? There is no sign of distress in the color or debre in the branches. This in interesting because this tree is just yards away from the heliapad.
3. The explosion from the plan: IF the explosion from the plane happened from jet fuel and there should be a blast wave that occures with something this large. Now, the question is. Since there are cars parked on the highway and people getting out the pictures of cars that I have looked at over the months don't have a single crack or haven't been blown out from the impact wave. Why? If it was a jet liner full of fuel this should have ocurred.


Just a couple of question that I would like answered. Love the research and I hope some answers come out of this.