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.
Originally posted by Seymour Butz
The reason I ask about the enclosure material is cuz in your first post you had this photo:
i40.photobucket.com...
That looks like aluminum to me, which would easily be melted by fires.
Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
It weighs 40,000 lbs so I doubt it.
I really don't know though.
Originally posted by Seymour Butz
Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
It weighs 40,000 lbs so I doubt it.
I really don't know though.
Uhhh, the generator would be the majority of the weight, dude.
The enclosure is just a cover. They're usually aluminum.
But I guess you're not too curious about it, eh?
posted by Craig Ranke CIT
What I do know is that the plane was nowhere near it.
posted by Seymour Butz
Uhhh, the generator would be the majority of the weight, dude.
The enclosure is just a cover. They're usually aluminum.
But I guess you're not too curious about it, eh?
posted by djeminy
Obviously, Seymour, you believe FL. 77 hit the generator, as you have been told it by the OS.
All those of us who are convinced a plane flew NOC because of the very strong evidence primarily gathered by CIT, obviously would not want to speculate about what actually did the damage to the generator, as from our perspective no one knows apart from the perps, of course.
Originally posted by djeminy
and therefore a waste of time.
Originally posted by Seymour Butz
Originally posted by djeminy
and therefore a waste of time.
Is that right?
If it's indeed aluminum, then that means that the whole side being missing, as shown in Craig's photo, is easily explained by the fires.
Isn't this a simpler explanation?
Originally posted by djeminy
Please read my post again.
You obviously must have missed the part where I told you, you're wasting your time
being querulous and captious.
Why do you behave like a sophist?
Don't you know that these demented people were thrown out of old Athens around
5th-century BC, and never allowed to return!
Why on earth would you like to emulate these unfortunate creatures!!
Please do yourself a favour and try to act normal.... at least for your own sake!
Originally posted by Seymour Butz
Originally posted by djeminy
Please read my post again.
You obviously must have missed the part where I told you, you're wasting your time
being querulous and captious.
Why do you behave like a sophist?
Don't you know that these demented people were thrown out of old Athens around
5th-century BC, and never allowed to return!
Why on earth would you like to emulate these unfortunate creatures!!
Please do yourself a favour and try to act normal.... at least for your own sake!
Translation:
I don't know whether or not the trailer was aluminum, and I don't want to know.
Because if it is..... then the side being gone can be explained rather simply, and blow my religious-like belief in this particular CT.
I therefore find it much better to attack a poster that is trying to expose me the absurd complexities and physics violations of this CT, rather than debate facts.
Originally posted by Seymour Butz
If it's indeed aluminum, then that means that the whole side being missing, as shown in Craig's photo, is easily explained by the fires.
Isn't this a simpler explanation?
Furthermore I never said the damage to the trailer was caused solely by diesel fires.
We will never know what types of incendiaries or explosives may have been used to start the fire, but since in this shot you can see through the other side of the trailer, and of course since we know the plane was on the north side and didn't hit it, we know that some type of weaponry was utilized.
posted by Seymour Butz
reply to post by SPreston
So where was April at, in relation to the generator?
At the X that SHE put on her map, right?
Originally posted by cogburn
Except that we do know what caused the damage, which was the entire point of my post. It was diesel fuel and the impact of a jet engine at high velocity that caused the damage. You assert something different without evidence and only conjecture that is easily countered.
If we assume the missing 4-6ft of the trailer was due to the impact of the plane, and given there is a large, non-symmetrical object inside, it's well within the realm of possibility that whatever was inside the trailer was responsible for the outward-damage on the north face of the trailer.
The plane impacted the trailer, rupturing the fuel tank and partially dragging the generator out of the trailer through the north side. This scenario is equally plausible, and unlike your "some type of weaponry" claim, infinitely more plausible.
Are you asserting that this is a possible point for planted explosives used to stage the impact of the plane?
There's absolutely nothing in the images to support such a claim.
Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
They had all the access, all the money, all the time, and all of the most advanced military weaponry available to them in the world.
Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
So please tell us.....if you found out it was steel would you admit that there is clearly something fishy going on with the generator trailer damage?
Originally posted by djeminy
Your reply actually reinforces the message therein more than anything else!