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.

 

9/11 last stand

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 18 2006 @ 12:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by warthog911

Originally posted by Vushta
Does it make any difference that people did not see a missile--they saw a plane.
The flight movements of a plane vs. missile are totally different.

If you were there on 911 and looking up ..would you confuse a missile for a plane? It just doesn't seem credible.

It could be optical camo and as you said the flight movements of a plane vs misisle are totally diff and as the flight mov suggest the thing that hit the pentagaon cannot be plane,it has to be a missile or someting hybrid
there was a post at ats about the manuvour of the flight 77 which only meant that this had to be missile.


Optical camo??

The different flight signatures are only one thing. Where was it launched from?
In its journey, didn't anyone notice?...."oh, look..a missile..don't see THAT everyday"? What clipped the generator and light poles? How big a missile are you imagining? How did they get the bodies in there with no one seeing? How did they plant all the body parts plane debris..seats..luggage..pieces of plane parts etc.?

Your whole assumption and what you seem to be accepting as evidence that 'it can only be explained by a missile' is the maneuver of the plane.

People tend to use phrases like "it can only be explained by"..or "there can be no other explaination but.." when there is no actual evidence to support the claim.

People...saw..the..plane.




posted on Jul, 18 2006 @ 12:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Vushta

Originally posted by Slap Nuts


What people?

A vast percentage all claim to have seen heard something DIFFERENT.

What are your sources for the above claims?


Again with answering a question with a question.

I gotta call you on this one tho'



A vast percentage all claim to have seen heard something DIFFERENT.


oh..reeeealy?

What are your sources for the above claims?



Your question is ambiguous and a trap: "Could I tell the difference between a missile or plane?"

Heck if I know. at 500+ MPH, seeing it for possibly les than a second, seeing a huge fireball and then being force fed that it was a 757/767... I do not know if I would know what I had seen at that point. IT all happened fast. Where does ANYONE describe the "spiral descent" of the plane? Why are there no photos or video of this minute loong manuver that would have needed to happen according to the 9/11 comission?

Secondly, you have cited no sources when asked but you expect me to? You are a pathetic shill without a leg to stand on.

I have read the many eyewitness accounts, I DO NOT trust eyewitness accounts because the human mind is moldable. It fills in blanks, believes repititon to be fact and many other anomalies which make it too fallible to trust.... HOWEVER, of all the Pentagon eyewitness statements I have read.... NONE of them agree on anything. Big plane, small plane, missile, trajectories, color scheme... They simply all disagree AND the fact that you are attempting to use these fallable/manipulated "eyewitnes accounts" to discredit/prove something is worthless.

You accuse me ov AVOIDING your questions yet YOU NEVER cite sources, respond to my DIRECT questions or stay on topic. If I were a mod. I would ban you for your constant attempts to derail threads with the same old BS.

If you believe the gov't story or are being put up to this... you are doing a HORRIBLE job of presenting any sort of case. You are being mildly successful at getting the actual debaters to quit posting because they are tired of dealing with a 4 year old.



posted on Jul, 18 2006 @ 12:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Vushta
People...saw..the..plane.


CORRECTION... people saw A plane. A flying object of some sort. You have NO PROOF they saw THE plane.



posted on Jul, 18 2006 @ 03:52 PM
link   
I have just and add in, it could have been a

Global Hawk

or

Predator like air craft, with a jet engine

Loaded with a great amount of explosives, now Iam just saying in return of the possibility of a hybrid aircraft, and it is possible for these aircraft to be launched from sea.



posted on Jul, 18 2006 @ 05:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by ragster
I have just and add in, it could have been a

Global Hawk

or

Predator like air craft, with a jet engine

Loaded with a great amount of explosives, now Iam just saying in return of the possibility of a hybrid aircraft, and it is possible for these aircraft to be launched from sea.


So how did they get all those dead bodies in there and what happened to flight 77?



posted on Jul, 19 2006 @ 06:08 AM
link   
Planes of 911 Exceeded Their Software Limits
by Jim Heikkila

Two of the aircraft exceeded their software limits on 9/11.

The Boeing 757 and 767 are equipped with fully autonomous flight capability, they are the only two Boeing commuter aircraft capable of fully autonomous flight. They can be programmed to take off, fly to a destination and land, completely without a pilot at the controls.

They are intelligent planes, and have software limits pre set so that pilot error cannot cause passenger injury. Though they are physically capable of high g maneuvers, the software in their flight control systems prevents high g maneuvers from being performed via the cockpit controls. They are limited to approximately 1.5 g's, I repeat, one and one half g's. This is so that a pilot mistake cannot end up breaking grandma's neck.

No matter what the pilot wants, he cannot override this feature.

The plane that hit the Pentagon approached or reached its actual physical limits, military personnel have calculated that the Pentagon plane pulled between five and seven g's in its final turn.

The same is true for the second aircraft to impact the WTC.

There is only one way this can happen.

As well as fully autonomous flight capability, the 767 and 757 are the ONLY COMMUTER PLANES MADE BY BOEING THAT CAN BE FLOWN VIA REMOTE CONTROL. It is a feature that is standard to all of them, all 757's and 767's can do it. The purpose for this is if there is a problem with the pilots, Norad can fly the planes to safe destinations via remote. Only in this flight mode can those craft exceed their software limits and perform to their actual physical limits because a pre existing emergency situation is assumed if this mode of flight is used.



www.abovetopsecret.com...



[edit on 19-7-2006 by warthog911]

[edit on 19-7-2006 by warthog911]



new topics

top topics
 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join