Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

757 Plane Did Not Hit Pentagon - Hard Visible Proof!

page: 2
20
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 15 2007 @ 11:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
What I do understand is my friend almost DYING that day as the jetliner slammed into the building he was in. Since he was a Naval Aviator, Ill take HIS word over yours as to just what hit his office.


So your saying he saw the boeing enter his office?




posted on Mar, 16 2007 @ 12:44 AM
link   
Im sorry, I know this is slightly off the main topic, and correct me if im wrong, but in regards to the remains found of passangers, isnt just a small sample of DNA needed? I would imagine you could put several dozen if not hundreds of samples in a small bag. Im not talking about body parts recovered or photographed. Im not really throwing my hat into one ring or another, just trying to add to it.



posted on Mar, 16 2007 @ 12:55 AM
link   
I'd like this to stay on the main thread topic.

There may be another thread in regards to DNA recovered, but I am looking at the obvious facts that we can all see and comment on. There are many experts in their field on ATS, that is one of the main reasons this site gets so much attention and people of like minds.

Anyhow welcome to ATS! You may want to do a search on WTC or Pentagon DNA, if you find nothing start a thread and I am quite sure many will chime in.

Thanks for your input

RT



Originally posted by projectionist
Im sorry, I know this is slightly off the main topic, and correct me if im wrong, but in regards to the remains found of passangers, isnt just a small sample of DNA needed? I would imagine you could put several dozen if not hundreds of samples in a small bag. Im not talking about body parts recovered or photographed. Im not really throwing my hat into one ring or another, just trying to add to it.


[edit on 16-3-2007 by Realtruth]



posted on Mar, 16 2007 @ 01:04 AM
link   
anybody participating in this thread, read catherder's thread on this subject? If you haven't you should. he sent an old conspiracy salt like John Lear packing on this point. In my opinion you are trying to reinvent the wheel with a lot less to work with than catherder put togehter on his thread. Really read it first. Finding the dead bodies from the plane amongst the wreckage is just the begining of the evidence.



posted on Mar, 16 2007 @ 01:47 AM
link   
Why doesn't the pentagon just release video a plane hitting it. They could put all this to rest if they wanted to. Of course i'm assuming that more then one video camera captured this event, which i don't think is totally unreasonable.



posted on Mar, 16 2007 @ 01:51 AM
link   
exactly,
if they wanted to they could put the CT's to rest, but they chose not tooo.
now, its NOT in there interests for citizens to DOUBT them.\
A lot of camera's surround the Pentagon, look at jacktrippers photos... there's plenty of angels it was caught from.
Why dont they release the UNEDITED version of the 911 reports too?

They release bs like sheik admitting to everything because only gullable sheep will beleive that and spout it.



posted on Mar, 16 2007 @ 02:34 AM
link   
Yes, that's certainly shocking new proof that a 757 did not hit the Pentagon. I can't say what did the damage, only that it was def. not a Boeing 757 as reported. How could you argue against that after seeing In plane Site? I wouldn’t even try.

I mean just look at the building damage. A 757 has a penetrating core of 50 feet (engine-fuselage-engine). hitting at 45 degrees, it's be 75 feet wide. Compare to bldg damage:


That’s only like maybe 20 feet of damage, tops. Okay maybe a little more. on each side. and the middle. but still, not near enough room for a 757. and the talifin should've sliced a nice raxor line in halfway up the building.

And the support columns! If an engine entered on the right, banked high as they say, it’d hit the top part of the big square column in the middle here. Yet the column is still there, bigger even than the others and at a weird angle. No way this is something else, lie a chunk of the second floor slab that fall after the column beneath it was wiped out by the right engine. That’d be silly…
(see graphic above: note: this graphic is slightly wrong; the right engine should be right on the upper half of this big column, and it clearly is clearly a column, just tilted by a bomb, or something.)

It pierced three rings with inner and outer walls people! How could an aluminum 757 built like a missile do that? The walls are each 18” of steel reinforced concrete! Considering the layout, in cross-section below, each dark gray line represents a heavy outer wall of this type. Just add them up. One, two… well, that’s 36” anyway, and only part of the landing gear made it through the second one. But still, it had to hit columns and take out chairs, drywall and some very heavy file cabinets.


And where did all that jet fuel go? With a wingspan of 125 feet, you’d expect like 150 feet-wide of fire AT LEAST. Instead what we get is this:


The fires would have burned for days and cooked the building like a pancake or whatever scientific phrase he used. But then how do we explain that unburnt stool on the first floo? The fires never touched the third floor, we’re told, but covered floors one and two. but that stool on floor one was untouched!

(note: first floor of the five-floor bldg is cropped off here)

And the planted parts that really do look like maybe a 757, or not: Here’s the movers and their mystery blue tarp box trying to sneak away:

And top secret stuff here, a photo of the box’s final location, stored with others, in true Raiders of the Lost Ark style, in a secret warehouse.


Are there any other points from this fine film you’d like me to address?
Some others covered here:
frustratingfraud.blogspot.com...
And right here on ATS:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Forgive me Realtruth, as I am a very sarcastic person. And I've been over this soooo many time's I'm getting pretty efficient I must say.

Any thoughts?

[edit on 16-3-2007 by Caustic Logic]

[edit on 16-3-2007 by Caustic Logic]



posted on Mar, 16 2007 @ 02:47 AM
link   
The 2nd last link for some reason doesnt allow me to click on it.

and im curious..


what do you think is in the box

and am I understanding you,

looking at the photo there are 3x boxes covered in blue tarp?



posted on Mar, 16 2007 @ 02:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
The 2nd last link for some reason doesnt allow me to click on it.

and im curious..


what do you think is in the box

and am I understanding you,

looking at the photo there are 3x boxes covered in blue tarp?


I think what is in the box is space for cleanup workers to decontaminate. And yes, the one pictured is one of three, pretty sure the bottom left one. Props to Russell Pickering for this graphic here.
Thanks for the heads up on the broken link.
Here it is (my own stuff BTW and genius)
frustratingfraud.blogspot.com... terlist.html

hope it works this time...

IMO, In plane Site was made to be slayed, a straw man from A-Z. Loose Change is a little slicker about it... and this is sad, when there are sooooo many GOOD reasons to doubt the official story.

[edit on 16-3-2007 by Caustic Logic]

[edit on 16-3-2007 by Caustic Logic]



posted on Mar, 16 2007 @ 02:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by ShAuNmAn-X
One question: Have you ever been to an airshow?
I used to be stationed on a Naval Air Station, I've seen planes fly that low to the ground at equal and higher speeds. It's not an impossibility, most trained pilots can do it.


There is a small difference though between a `trained and skilled pilot` flying a 30 tons agile aircraft and a pilot with a PPL flying a 100 Ton airliner at 20 feet off the ground at 400 mph



posted on Mar, 16 2007 @ 03:19 AM
link   
How does that prove that a 757 didn't hit the pentagon? 400 MPH in a 757 would still produce enough lift to pull it off, they weren't pulling an airshow trick. It doesn't take a trained pilot to crash a plane into a building anyhow.

[edit on 3/16/2007 by ShAuNmAn-X]



posted on Mar, 16 2007 @ 03:20 AM
link   
Yes, indeedee. It's not so much fun at a conspiracy site to rain on parades with acid rain of caustic logic, but the only reason to believe no 757 hit the Pentagon is the combination of two things:
1) Hundreds of "experts" and "scholars" have insisted no 757 could have hit the building.
2) Most people are too lazy to look at the evidence for themselves.

Now I'm no genius, but looking at the actual evidence, ALL of it, not just the few photos that show nothing or cover the hole with fire hose spray as they tell you there's no hole, I see a 757 as at least plausible. At least.

Ant these smart people insist it's impossible or nearly so. That's wrong information, AKA misinformation. Unless they're retarded they should know better. they do know better.

When you sow misinfo and know better, it becomes disinfo.

That said, feel free to speculate for fun on whatever tickles y'all's mystery glands. People that actually want to know, at least consider what I'm sayin.' Peace.



posted on Mar, 16 2007 @ 03:24 AM
link   
I agree with you caustic, but as far as the conspiracy goes, people don't need to be going over "if" a 757 hit the Pentagon (which it obviously did IMO my friends wouldn't lie about that to me) they need to be going over the real reason it was done and who was behind it. The no 757 thing is one of the holes in the Truth movement as I see it. If people wanna believe that there was no 757 that's fine, while they're at it they can also believe that the sun isn't really there neither is the air we breathe..

[edit on 3/16/2007 by ShAuNmAn-X]



posted on Mar, 16 2007 @ 03:37 AM
link   
Yeah, and I'm sorry about your friend, man. I'm sure you've got some serious feelings about the issue, yet you sound pretty reasonable. Yeah the no-plane thing is somebody's weak point. But people like to have fun with proof and mystery, and I don't mean to screw that up for them, nor let this pass as "truth."
Take care

[edit on 16-3-2007 by Caustic Logic]



posted on Mar, 16 2007 @ 03:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Caustic Logic
Yeah, and I'm sorry about your friend, man.
[edit on 16-3-2007 by Caustic Logic]

None of my friends were killed, they just saw the thing whilst out and about. I think you may be referring to Swampfox, his friend almost was killed. Yeah I'm generally a pretty reasonable person, and as a reasonable person I don't believe even for half a second that no plane hit the pentagon. I follow the PentaCon because it's interesting to see people going to those lengths to prove their point. Until someone offers me some ultimately irrefutable evidence PROVING that no plane hit. I will not disbelieve my friends. And as far as this thread goes I'll offer up a quote from Carl Sagan:"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"



posted on Mar, 16 2007 @ 03:59 AM
link   
Oops my bad. I'm awful at actually readin threads carefully - I just skim and do the gestalt thing. It's usually efficient enough...
the Carl Sagan quote is apropos. Yet we're confronted with "billions and bilions of fraudsters."



posted on Mar, 16 2007 @ 04:05 AM
link   
Yeah, and sorting through the vast sea of it all is what makes places like this fun.

Common Sense-1
Truth Movement-0

You guys have to really bring more to the table than this to make me a believer.



posted on Mar, 16 2007 @ 04:14 AM
link   
Oh we got it! Stick around, sport. I'm just waiting to see what Realtruth has to say. I guess that's a tomorrow thing...



posted on Mar, 16 2007 @ 04:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by ShAuNmAn-X
How does that prove that a 757 didn't hit the pentagon? 400 MPH in a 757 would still produce enough lift to pull it off, they weren't pulling an airshow trick. It doesn't take a trained pilot to crash a plane into a building anyhow.

[edit on 3/16/2007 by ShAuNmAn-X]


it doesn`t - it disproves what your trying to say about someone with 10 hours flight time flying a 100 ton airliner at 400 mph at 20 feet above the ground for nearly a 1/2 mile - the administration have stated that these pilots flew cessna`s then spent a little time playing pc games then onto an airliner.

lift has nothing to do with this , rather training and skill does.

so either - they were far more highly trained (ie military) than at first thought - civilian airline pilots don`t train for this kind of thing - and don`t say itv require skill , as you are insulting aviators the world over if any tom , dick or harry could do this or

there is something else involved - auto piloted aircraft or something else.


read the parts in bold - the only time a `normal` pilot is at that altitude is either at V3 for take off or 2 seconds before touch down - they don`t fly straight and true and 20 feet at all.



posted on Mar, 16 2007 @ 04:20 AM
link   
Somebody's always gotta have the last word....









 
20
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join