A boeing 757 did hit the two towers

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 13 2007 @ 03:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by esdad71

Also, it was not men, but 4 pilots. 4 men trained to do ONE thing.


Not in one year. Not in 5. Not in 10 years. No Islamic Fundamentalist, or one pretending to be an Islamic Fundamentalist, or one who looked like an Islamic Fundamentalist ever boarded those airplanes or flew those airplanes or crashed those airlanes into the WTC. It did not happen that way. It could not happen that way. And that is my opinion and it is an opinion based on 40 years in the airline industry.


The biggest hole in the hologram story is the "noise generation". If it was a hologram, how did people know to look up? They heard it coming, and it was not the train.


I am not going to argue the holograph theory at this point but current state of the art holographs contain as much noise as you want.


John, what is your personal take on Flight 93?


Wherever the real Flight 93 ended up it did not end up in the smoking hole in Shanksville. There was no possible way, absolutely none, nada, that any 757 was in that smoking hole in Shanksville. There may have been a few 'planted' parts. But there was no Boeing 757 in that smoking hole. Anymore than there was a Boeing 757 in the Pentagon. The notion that a Boeing 757 crashed into the Pentagon is not supported by the facts nor is it supported by any wing length crash marks on the outside of the Pentagon.




posted on Feb, 14 2007 @ 10:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hobbes
How can some people say "Terrorists organized, and then hijacked planes, and used their piloting skills to fly the planes into targets, with mixed success" is completely beyond the realm of believability.

AND THEN, turn around and say that "alien holography projectors and planted explosives were used to simulate the destruction of the towers, after real planes were hidden and remote control versions replaced them" is not only reasonable, but obvious.

Occam's razor, folks. Are we that detached from reality these days, that we can't accept simple answers?


It's almost impossible for them to get a direct hit at the target, they probably faked the hijackers identity, made up new people, as by making them the prime suspects of the attacks they could blame the group of al-quaida so because of that we fight a war based on their wrongdoings. Does that make perfect sense to you?



posted on Feb, 14 2007 @ 11:28 AM
link   
Thank you for your opinion John, but it is also your opinion that there is NO way that a pilot could have pulled that off? If you trained, for one thing for years, it becomes second nature. You as a pilot should know that. You can fly any plane, but aren't there ones that you are more comfortable with. If you trained on the same plane weekly for 2 or 3 years, do you not think you could perfect your mission?



posted on Feb, 14 2007 @ 11:36 AM
link   
Why would they fabricate the WTC collapse and the pentagon attack?

The real conspiracy is not that planes didn`t hit the WTC/Pentagon.It`s that they did in the way the media has covered.

To say the US govt made these planes fly into the WTC or that they used holograms and Hollywood is just stupid.

The US can`t get the Iraqi war right, it`s another Vietnam (History repeating), but they can use Holograms in the middle of huge cities, explode the buildings and make everybody believe it was Bin Laden is ludicrous.

The only thing the American govt is probably guilty of is knowing that Bin and the boys would attack the US and allowed them to do it.That the intel was spot on, but the Security services were made to ignore it.That is frankly more plausible.The knew an attack on the US was immanent and after would be allowed to respond.Bush and the intel community miscalculated the type/size of the attack.That`s probably fueled America`s response to AL and the boys.

If America wanted to start the war it could have more easily deceived the US people far easier than crashing planes into the WTC and the Pentagon.It found out that Bin was about to attack the US and used that instead.

If the US did fabricate Bin and crashed the planes they would have also hidden the WMD in Iraq to help further the disinfo.This never happened so all we have left is a President who miscalculated Bin Ladens capabilities and allowed them to attack the US.He also miscalculated the Iraq people and faction's within the structure of Iraq.

So all the US is left with is a history of miscalculations,judgments and underestimations.

History repeating itself Again.



posted on Feb, 14 2007 @ 11:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by esdad71
Thank you for your opinion John, but it is also your opinion that there is NO way that a pilot could have pulled that off? If you trained, for one thing for years, it becomes second nature. You as a pilot should know that. You can fly any plane, but aren't there ones that you are more comfortable with. If you trained on the same plane weekly for 2 or 3 years, do you not think you could perfect your mission?


I was refering to making the hit on the first pass. I probbly couldn't have done that and the reason is that at 800 feet altitude you can't see very far ahead of you are travelling 880 ft. per second (600 mph) downtown Manhatten. The only way to do that is to visually pick up some landmarks, say one every mile or so that you can determine if you are on course. It might take 2 or 3 runs to get the course figured out. But the first Run? The first time in a Boeing 757? No. That can't be done.



posted on Feb, 14 2007 @ 11:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
I probbly couldn't have done that and the reason is that at 800 feet altitude you can't see very far ahead of you are travelling 880 ft. per second (600 mph) downtown Manhatten. The only way to do that is to visually pick up some landmarks, say one every mile or so that you can determine if you are on course. It might take 2 or 3 runs to get the course figured out. But the first Run? The first time in a Boeing 757? No. That can't be done.


So how do planes get on the runway of an airport.Second thought couldn`t the auto pilot be used to run the plane on a course that would take it through the towers.

[edit on 14-2-2007 by st111]



posted on Feb, 16 2007 @ 11:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by st111

Originally posted by johnlear
I probbly couldn't have done that and the reason is that at 800 feet altitude you can't see very far ahead of you are travelling 880 ft. per second (600 mph) downtown Manhatten. The only way to do that is to visually pick up some landmarks, say one every mile or so that you can determine if you are on course. It might take 2 or 3 runs to get the course figured out. But the first Run? The first time in a Boeing 757? No. That can't be done.


So how do planes get on the runway of an airport.Second thought couldn`t the auto pilot be used to run the plane on a course that would take it through the towers.

[edit on 14-2-2007 by st111]

Autopilot could have been used, but I say that's highly unlikely. I am with JohnLear on this, because the terrorists couldn't have possibly existed. They knew of an attack... but then again, all they did was accept the blame of responsibility, it's a natural reaction, when you are blamed for an attack, all you can do is to respond to it and say you did it. You can't deny it or they will just accept it so they can act. It would not make sense for them to have done it. How do you know they were taking orders from them?



posted on Feb, 16 2007 @ 11:41 AM
link   
John,

I have total respect for your opinions on this and consider myself to be completely openminded surrounding each important event on that tragic day but having recently watched one of the many documentaries on 9/11 which featured
interviews with people who were actually on and around the floors where one of the planes struck and described the enormous noise, destruction and subsequent smoke which resulted from the plane striking the tower, I think he may have also described the sight of the wings striking the floor he was on but I need to look into that.
It is just hard for me to believe in your theory after hearing this type of account.
thanks.



posted on Feb, 16 2007 @ 12:23 PM
link   
Actually, the title of the thread is kind of like the old "what two coins equal 30 cents and one cannot be a nickel" since a 757 did not hit the towers, a 767 did. Twice.

Saying no one could do it is a very egotistical thing to say also Mr. Lear. I respect your qualifications and mean no disrespct. Now, one can be qualified to do many things, but a master of none. If you were given a mission, and you had a few years to train, you could do it. The landmark they picked were the WTC. You cannot get much bigger than that.

Is the holographic data that you are using something that is DARPA related or private contract?



posted on Feb, 16 2007 @ 12:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by st111

Originally posted by johnlear
I probbly couldn't have done that and the reason is that at 800 feet altitude you can't see very far ahead of you are travelling 880 ft. per second (600 mph) downtown Manhatten. The only way to do that is to visually pick up some landmarks, say one every mile or so that you can determine if you are on course. It might take 2 or 3 runs to get the course figured out. But the first Run? The first time in a Boeing 757? No. That can't be done.


So how do planes get on the runway of an airport.Second thought couldn`t the auto pilot be used to run the plane on a course that would take it through the towers.

[edit on 14-2-2007 by st111]

I'm gonna help John out here because he's the ATS member I'd most like to have a beer with.
Commercial airliners make their final approach at anywhere from 120-200 miles per hour.
answers.google.com...
Anyone who's driven like an idiot knows that there is a big difference between 100mph and 25-40mph when controlling a car.
Of course I might be wrong.

John, back me up, homie.



posted on Feb, 17 2007 @ 03:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sunsetspawn

Commercial airliners make their final approach at anywhere from 120-200 miles per hour.


Maybe they made a slow approach and hit the juice in the final few moments.

How do jet fighter display teams make high speed precision maneuvers.There`s no evidence to support they could/couldn`t pull this off.Whilst you have people who could say it`s impossible you also have pilots who say it`s possible.Until somebody recreate the exact same incident it impossible to know either way.

They may well have thought hell lets go for the WTC towers if we miss them well just crash in the center of the city.Maybe they just got lucky.We don`t know for sure that the WTC were there only target, they may well have had secondary targets if they missed.

Think about it.

[edit on 17-2-2007 by st111]



posted on Apr, 17 2007 @ 10:36 PM
link   
Okay, after reading through the thread I see that JohnLear disagreed with me and said something else that changed the topic of the thread.

So let's get back on topic. There is no reason to believe that there is a conspiracy involved with 9-11. The worst idea that they have is controlled demolition, but other then that, they haven't gotten anywhere.

If something was projected on a screen you would see the projection.

If something was demolished you would see the force that was used to demolish the object in the video, you don't see that here.

Please prove it.



posted on Apr, 18 2007 @ 09:11 PM
link   
JOHNLEAR, you have provided me with what makes the entire 9-11 truth movement look laughable. You discredited 9-11 conspiracy theorists, and then you say that your opinions are more than facts, and that planes did not crash into the pentagon, then you go onto say that you did not say that alien technology may have been involved with it.

Plus, you say that Islamic fundementalists did not attack us on 9-11. It's like Pearl harbour, the real conspiracy is that they let it happen only because of faulty intelligence.

Please don't tell me you have been brainwashed to think that people don't make honest mistakes and if you think the Patriot act is bad, you are either a terrorist, or you have conducted in illegal activities. I have read through some of its acts and it is for the protection of our country (the newer version).

Please, do not post false statements as facts.



posted on Apr, 19 2007 @ 01:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Maverickhunter

Please, do not post false statements as facts.





OK. No Boeing 757 hit either of the twin towers. Thats a fact.



posted on Apr, 19 2007 @ 05:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by st111
Maybe they made a slow approach and hit the juice in the final few moments....
....How do jet fighter display teams make high speed precision maneuvers.There`s no evidence to support they could/couldn`t pull this off. Think about it.


First off a 767 is not a jet fighter. A jet fighter is like a Ferrari formula one race car, a jet airliner is like a bus. Can a bus maneuver and accelerate like a Ferrari?

Take your own advice and think about it, but you'd better get educated on the subject first...



posted on Apr, 19 2007 @ 05:34 AM
link   
As far as holographic technology some of you are in the dark ages...


IO2 Technology offers a commercially available free-space display-- the Heliodisplay (tm) platform. This embryonic stage of this display developed at IO2, is in it's initial phase intended for 'light' applications. The company also develops completely disparate systems for that are highly advanced systems for mission-specific applications. These are not publicly advertised. Under development are alternate displays solutions and interfaces for novel visualization, situational awareness, and re-organization of I/O space.



5.6 Airborne Holographic Projector

Brief Description

The holographic projector displays a three-dimensional visual image in a desired location, removed from the display
generator. The projector can be used for psychological operations and strategic perception management. It is also useful for optical deception and cloaking, providing a momentary distraction when engaging an unsophisticated adversary.

Source


How about a missile holographicaly cloaked to look like a commercial jet?
It would explain all the missing wing anomaly's we see on the vids, and the obvious lack of airplane parts at the pentagoon?



posted on Apr, 19 2007 @ 09:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK

Originally posted by st111
Maybe they made a slow approach and hit the juice in the final few moments....
....How do jet fighter display teams make high speed precision maneuvers.There`s no evidence to support they could/couldn`t pull this off. Think about it.


First off a 767 is not a jet fighter. A jet fighter is like a Ferrari formula one race car, a jet airliner is like a bus. Can a bus maneuver and accelerate like a Ferrari?

Take your own advice and think about it, but you'd better get educated on the subject first...

That was a typo. That was an honeset mistake.
I clicked one button to the right of the five when typing that.



posted on Apr, 19 2007 @ 04:57 PM
link   
Well said sp00ner. Wait, that means I'm a disinfo agent, as well as you. Do you work for the CIA too? No, u must work for the FBI. I never heard of you before.



posted on Apr, 19 2007 @ 08:09 PM
link   
double post sry

[edit on 19/4/2007 by ANOK]



posted on Apr, 19 2007 @ 08:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Maverickhunter
Maybe they made a slow approach and hit the juice in the final few moments....
Originally posted by st111
That was a typo. That was an honeset mistake.
I clicked one button to the right of the five when typing that.


Huh? What was a typo? You didn't even write that, you're not 'st111', or am I missing something here?

Are you posting under two names


[edit on 19/4/2007 by ANOK]





new topics
top topics
 
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join