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.

 

Somone Please Tell Me.... Flight 77

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 3 2007 @ 08:44 AM
link   
If anyone bothers to take a look at the original five frams tape... in full, why that whenever you see the plane outline but is blocked off by the podeum and then it crashes... remember its size... now think about this a little bit later in the film a police car comes by the spot where "flight 77" flew over. Now whats wierd is that the plane that hit the pentagon is only around 3 times bigger than the cop car.... so if the government is trying to say a boeing 757 is the size of a cop car... I guess we have to believe it right? wrong




posted on Feb, 4 2007 @ 06:37 PM
link   
Sincerely looking for an answer?
I'm working on a post on this I'll share here when done. I think almost everyone has the 2002 stills wrong. I think they're authentic or accurately faked and show a 757-size white/silver object moving fast on roughly the alleged attack path. Not just from the frames but also eyewitness and physical evidence and common sense. The frames prove little, but do nothing at all to disprove a 757.

The podium is I think the second camera (actually camera one as per Judicial Watch's 5/16/06 videos.) The plane is not hidden except the tip. The 2002 stills: it's the white blur I'm pretty sure. In the 2006 video (camera 1) i's just the tip of it we see.
As for the cop car - I thot that was right before the crash? anyway, size is hard to read here - it's a wide wide lawn and the cameras have fisheye lenses. Grasping at straws is easier in fisheye 'cause the straws look bigger.



posted on Feb, 4 2007 @ 07:07 PM
link   
I will direct you to two youtube videos that helped me very much with this subject.

911 case study

pentagon take a closer look

edit: you probably should've read this thread as well before posting. 911- A boeing 757 hit the pentagon

[edit on 4-2-2007 by lizziex3]



posted on Feb, 5 2007 @ 12:09 PM
link   
Yes Ive already seen both, the animation is a bunch of horse#, the second one i strongly agree with... what the hell is that thing? looks so close to being a missile... but look at the video the cop car is only half the size of the thing.



posted on Feb, 5 2007 @ 02:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Caustic Logic
Not just from the frames but also eyewitness and physical evidence and common sense. The frames prove little, but do nothing at all to disprove a 757.



Of all the eywitnesses thaey could not verify it to be a 757.

The photos of parts at the Pentagon can be from other plenes then a 757, thier are several planes that use that type of wheel. Plus thier is no source for the photos, who took them and when/where they were taken.



posted on Feb, 5 2007 @ 04:30 PM
link   
thank you ultima1, and whats more dumb, how can you beliebve about the debris? the plane supposivdly was insinerated when it struck... but somehow those pieces were not singed at all?? yea im sure, next thing i will here is that there was a survivor



posted on Feb, 5 2007 @ 07:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mck526
Yes Ive already seen both, the animation is a bunch of horse#, the second one i strongly agree with... what the hell is that thing? looks so close to being a missile... but look at the video the cop car is only half the size of the thing.



what? you can clearly see its a blue airplane. It looks nothing like a missle. and all i can say about the animation is that it is not BS. I don't know why Truthers even make these threads because it's obvious they will never believe anything other than what they already believe, no matter how untrue it is.



posted on Feb, 5 2007 @ 09:00 PM
link   
Have you watched the NTSB animation video of Flight 77, and how according to this video, Flight 77 did not hit the light poles, and did not approach the Pentagon along the "official" flight path as described by the 9/11 Commission Report?



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 02:21 AM
link   


This guy's job was to measure size via images for the government... apparently we really can trust what we see versus what we are told we are seeing.



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 09:10 AM
link   
yeah. because the government knocking over the lightpolls makes so much sense. seriously. if I told you the moon was really a square would you believe me just because the government says otherwise?



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 09:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Surface

This guy's job was to measure size via images for the government... apparently we really can trust what we see versus what we are told we are seeing.


All I can say is that guy is an idiot and has done no research on to what would make the hole that size. He knows how to interpret size from a photo, yeah. But he knows nothing about what happens when a giant plane crashes into a concrete wall at a very high speed.



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 09:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by lizziex3
yeah. because the government knocking over the lightpolls makes so much sense. seriously. if I told you the moon was really a square would you believe me just because the government says otherwise?


Lizzie,

It was the government's National Transportation Safety Board animation of the flight path of Flight 77 that shows that Flight 77 could not have hit the 5 light poles that were found on the ground.

It was not some flake 9/11 Truth Movement guru who put out this information. It was the NTSB. The NTSB animation does not match up with the 9/11 Commission Report, or the physical evidence which is documented in dozens of photos of the light poles.

What we have here is two government agencies providing contradictory information. Interestingly, it took 5 years for the NTSB to release their information, which contradicts the "official" story, and if true, proves the the Pentagon attack was not carried out by Flight 77.

Have you seen the NTSB video?


Google Video Link



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 01:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mck526
thank you ultima1, and whats more dumb, how can you beliebve about the debris? the plane supposivdly was insinerated when it struck... but somehow those pieces were not singed at all?? yea im sure, next thing i will here is that there was a survivor


Whats funny is how a plane mostly made of aluminum can punch through a reinforced concrete wall, 13 collums and interior walls and then disintergrate in the fire, also if the fire was hot enough to destroy the plane it would have also destroyed the bodies and the DNA evidence.



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 01:21 PM
link   
Ultima, I'm not sure where you get your information, but full bodies/remains were recovered for each and every passenger on that jet including the hijackers. Those for which the pathologists had DNA samples for, were identified (which includes the entire crew and passengers on the jet)

Or are you going to claim that you dont believe this because the FBI/NTSB did not come to your house and give you a report about it?



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 01:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
Ultima, I'm not sure where you get your information, but full bodies/remains were recovered for each and every passenger on that jet including the hijackers. Those for which the pathologists had DNA samples for, were identified (which includes the entire crew and passengers on the jet)

Or are you going to claim that you dont believe this because the FBI/NTSB did not come to your house and give you a report about it?


As stated if the fire was hot enough to completly destroy the plane it would have also destroyed bodies and DNA evidence.

Back in 2001 they did not have the DNA testing to test bodies that been severely burned. It took NIST experts untill 2002 to come up with new testing, but they had already identified people on the planes without the new testing.

www.nist.gov...

Dr. John Butler is a research chemist within the Biotechnology Division at NIST. He has written Forensic DNA Typing: Biology and Technology behind STR Markers (Academic Press, 2001), which received high honors from the British Medical Association Book Competition in November 2001 and is now the leading textbook in the field. President George W. Bush recognized Dr. Butler in July 2002 as one of 60 young scientists to receive the prestigious Presidential Early Career Award for Scientists and Engineers (PECASE). Dr. Butler leads the forensics/human identity testing project team at NIST and has been involved in the field for the past ten years developing new methods and technologies for forensic DNA typing.

Due to the nature of the World Trade Center disaster, it quickly became evident that traditional methods for performing DNA typing were not likely to be fully successful in identifying all of the recovered remains. Traditional DNA ID methods depend on the presence of long, intact segments of DNA in order to accurately type the sample. The DNA in many of the samples recovered in this situation were so fragmented that these standard methods were ineffective.

In early November 2001, Dr. Robert Shaler, the director of the WTC DNA identification effort, contacted me and asked if I would be willing to develop some new DNA tests to help in the identification effort. I agreed to fast track our research efforts over the next several months and produce some test materials for his laboratory to try by January 2002.


Also you need to do more research to find that 5 bodies from the Pentagon were not identified.

www.arlingtoncemetery.net...

The remains of five people killed in the terrorist attack on the Pentagon were damaged beyond identification in the massive explosion and fire after a hijacked airliner crashed into the building's west side, officials said.




[edit on 6-2-2007 by ULTIMA1]

[edit on 6-2-2007 by ULTIMA1]

[edit on 6-2-2007 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 02:32 PM
link   
ultima1 has the exact point, how could they identify every passenger and hijackers. but when a plane made of metal and steel hits the pentagon it is demolished into dust? it just doesnt make sense... that must mean bodies are stronger than airplanes



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 12:32 AM
link   
Holy cow you guys just keep going! Surface: Stubblebine is a kook. He thinks he can walk thru walls and will lve to 250. What diff does it make if HE thinks the plane doesn't fit? The evidence is what matters. I don't think he believes what he says anyway. He's most likely another disinfo agent, paid or volunteer.
And I'll take the silence on my original answer to MCK's original question as a "no thank you, I don't really want to see the 757. I prefer my fantasy." I'd be fair and ask you (either Ultima or Mck or Nick or Surface) to try to convince me, but there's not a new trick you could pull -I've been studying them all and have answers for all. The small hole, the "lack" of plane parts, the unmarked lawn, the seized videos, the white blur, the eyewitnesses, etc.
And finally not everything about 9/11 was a lie. I think we all agree w/the Gov that it was on a Tuesday. So the question is where to draw the line of disagreement. I'm of the belief that FACTS are valuable in this process, not Stubblebine or Rokke or Nelson or Avery or Von Kleist or Flocco or Szymanski or... .



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 01:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Caustic Logic
I'd be fair and ask you (either Ultima or Mck or Nick or Surface) to try to convince me, but there's not a new trick you could pull -I've been studying them all and have answers for all. The small hole, the "lack" of plane parts, the unmarked lawn, the seized videos, the white blur, the eyewitnesses, etc.
And finally not everything about 9/11 was a lie. I think we all agree w/the Gov that it was on a Tuesday. So the question is where to draw the line of disagreement. I'm of the belief that FACTS are valuable in this process, not Stubblebine or Rokke or Nelson or Avery or Von Kleist or Flocco or Szymanski or... .


Dear Mr. Logic... did you watch the NTSB animation video of the flight path of Flight 77?

Do you have an answer for this?



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 01:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mck526
ultima1 has the exact point, how could they identify every passenger and hijackers. but when a plane made of metal and steel hits the pentagon it is demolished into dust? it just doesnt make sense... that must mean bodies are stronger than airplanes


Correction thier MCK, the 757 is mostly made of aluminum. Which is why its so hard to believe that it went through a reinforced concrete wall, 13 sets of collums and interior walls.


Originally posted by Caustic Logic
Holy cow you guys just keep going! Surface: Stubblebine is a kook. He thinks he can walk thru walls and will lve to 250. What diff does it make if HE thinks the plane doesn't fit? The evidence is what matters. I don't think he believes what he says anyway. He's most likely another disinfo agent, paid or volunteer.
And I'll take the silence on my original answer to MCK's original question as a "no thank you, I don't really want to see the 757. I prefer my fantasy." I'd be fair and ask you (either Ultima or Mck or Nick or Surface) to try to convince me, but there's not a new trick you could pull -I've been studying them all and have answers for all. The small hole, the "lack" of plane parts, the unmarked lawn, the seized videos, the white blur, the eyewitnesses, etc.
And finally not everything about 9/11 was a lie. I think we all agree w/the Gov that it was on a Tuesday. So the question is where to draw the line of disagreement. I'm of the belief that FACTS are valuable in this process, not Stubblebine or Rokke or Nelson or Avery or Von Kleist or Flocco or Szymanski or... .


Maybe you can explain why we do not have any FBI reports on any of the aircraft crime scenes.

I can find FBI and NTSB reports on every other aircraft crime scene but nothing on any of the 911 aircraft.

[edit on 7-2-2007 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 04:27 PM
link   
Cool... Both questions I'm less familiar with.. dangit, this crap keeps coming.
Ultima: I'm not familiar with that but have heard it around. If they really haven't released info, that's yet another odditiy, but could have different explanations.
Nick: I've seen the animation in Pandora's Black Box if that's what you mean. It is odd, but I don't know what to make of it. FDR stops at 9:37:45, supposed impact time but with the plane still in the air, half-mile or so away and 500 feet in the air. What does this mean?
1) Plane shot down there is why the FDR stops. No one has reported a 757 being shot down right by the Pentagon, no large debris field etc.
2) Overflight - 757 flies over Pentagon or otherwise diverts, FDR simply shuts off here or is truncated just as the "missile" hits, and then landed and downloaded.
3) The NTSB or someone truncated the video and scooted time-stamp back to foster consp. th.
4) There was no Flight 77, just this faked FDR, which they faked wrong.

And if this plane did not hit the Pentagon or clip the light poles, we're left with not only the old Q "where's the passengers" (where's JimmyHoffa?) but also what could pop the light poles and cause a 757-size damage pattern on the ground floor. I got it! 77 flew over, and then a missile shaped like a 757, filled with passengers and crew and five "terrorsists" en route to deport hearing in Cali is launched into the building, clipping light poles and plowing into the building. Now just skip the irrelevant overflying plane and you got my theory.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join