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.

 

Lack of foundation damage puts an end to 757 impact debate at the Pentagon

page: 14
22
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 9 2007 @ 07:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by SEA-Alien
from seanm:

Amateur research like yours is fun but you need to learn the subject matteDoubt all you want, but what you imagine should have happened is different than what hundreds of people who know better know what happened.

from Alien:
Prove us wrong, seanm--- get the Gov't to release any and all video surveillance tapes from 'anywhere' around the Pentagon from 9/11/01. I have been involved in Aviation for 40+years - and I know a 757 when I see one. So far, I have not seen, that a 757 hit the Pentagon. The mere fact that the Gov't holds this evidence "is a cover-up'. They can end this overnight if they release the original tapes to a Blue Ribbon panel to view them...and report back to the American public. All I need is one look at any 'real' and not doctored video surveillance tape from 9/11/01 - and I will be the first to admit your were right all along - if a 757 is on any of those tapes--So-get the tapes for us - not doctored - but original tapes - and then we'll see who is correct...!!!

If there is no jet visible on any of those tapes - then why can't they be released.....................????? I feel, they have something to hide.

SEA Alien


Strawman. You don't need a video to know AA77 hit the Pentagon.




posted on Oct, 11 2007 @ 11:08 AM
link   

Strawman. You don't need a video to know AA77 hit the Pentagon.

The government disagrees with you.

They denied the FOIA for the tapes of the incident (not the webcam tapes, the ones made by private citizens that show the actual impact) citing ongoing trial.

If the tapes were not needed to prove the impact the information would not be needed for the trial and therefore either
a. be released
or
b. with held and another reason given.

Source



posted on Oct, 11 2007 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by jprophet420

Strawman. You don't need a video to know AA77 hit the Pentagon.

The government disagrees with you.


Irrelevant. A video does not establish whether AA77 hit or not. ALL of the evidence does, all that evidence that Truthers can't refute.


They denied the FOIA for the tapes of the incident (not the webcam tapes, the ones made by private citizens that show the actual impact) citing ongoing trial.


There is no information about any video showing an actual impact and it is irrelevant anyway.


If the tapes were not needed to prove the impact the information would not be needed for the trial and therefore either
a. be released
or
b. with held and another reason given.

Source


Sorry, you are committing a logical fallacy, the fallacy of false alternatives.

As we all well know, there are multiple lines of evidence establishing whether an event happened or not. A video or photographs are irrelevant to knowing whether or not AA77 hit the Pentagon whether photos or videos are withheld or not.

By the way, if everyone wants to see how mixed up, confused, and contradictory amateur investigator Craig Ranke is, take a look at this video showing how poor a grasp of reality, evidence, facts, and forensic science Craig has:

www.thestream.tv...



posted on Oct, 11 2007 @ 03:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by seanm

By the way, if everyone wants to see how mixed up, confused, and contradictory amateur investigator Craig Ranke is, take a look at this video showing how poor a grasp of reality, evidence, facts, and forensic science Craig has:

www.thestream.tv...



Ha!

How about quoting an example to support your hollow claim?

So far your colleagues at jref have only been able to come up with childish ridicule about my looks etc.



[edit on 11-10-2007 by Craig Ranke CIT]



posted on Oct, 11 2007 @ 05:17 PM
link   
reply to post by seanm
 

i'm sorry but you have to go on ignore now. you don't support your own claims and argue in circles. when i burned you on the logical fallacy thing last time you conveniently changed the subject, etc etc.

ill have one of my friends PM me if you decide to make yourself worth listening to.

GG.



posted on Oct, 12 2007 @ 01:04 PM
link   
Shameless off topic link time:

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Oct, 12 2007 @ 02:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by seanm
Irrelevant. A video does not establish whether AA77 hit or not. ALL of the evidence does, all that evidence that Truthers can't refute.


What actual evidence do you have that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon?



posted on Oct, 12 2007 @ 02:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by jprophet420
reply to post by seanm
 

i'm sorry but you have to go on ignore now.


Sorry you are unable to refute me in any way, JP. Naturally, you have to run away again lest reality and truth impinge on you too much.

There is nothing much else you can do since I repeatedly show that you neither have a grasp of logical thinking nor any concept of reality, much less have any evidence to support your "case" at all.

You will just have to live with the fact that AA77 hit the Pentagon and no amount of your ridiculous evasions of the evidence will help you prove otherwise.

Consider coming on over to the side of Truth, JP.



posted on Oct, 12 2007 @ 03:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by seanm
You will just have to live with the fact that AA77 hit the Pentagon and no amount of your ridiculous evasions of the evidence will help you prove otherwise.

Consider coming on over to the side of Truth, JP.


I have not seen any facts that flight 77 hit the Pentagon. None of the parts found have ever been matched to Flight 77.

The truth is that you cannot provide any evidence to support the official story.



posted on Oct, 12 2007 @ 03:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT

Originally posted by seanm

By the way, if everyone wants to see how mixed up, confused, and contradictory amateur investigator Craig Ranke is, take a look at this video showing how poor a grasp of reality, evidence, facts, and forensic science Craig has:

www.thestream.tv...



Ha!

How about quoting an example to support your hollow claim?


I'm already on record as having shown your evasion of the evidence. You are on record as denying the evidence that you don't like. Sorry, Craig, you're the new poster boy for 9/11 Denial in its most egregious form.


So far your colleagues at jref have only been able to come up with childish ridicule about my looks etc.


Since you have been wholly unable to deal with all of the evidence which refutes your Official Pentagon Fantasy (OPF), there isn't much left to do but laugh at your bellicose ignorance as an uneducated amateur investigator.

In the meantime, the facts remain unrefuted: there is no question that AA77 hit the Pentagon on 9/11/2001.

But do carry on, Craig, so as to illustrate how nonsensical the 9/11 Truth Movement is, thereby guaranteeing it's own demise. JP already knows it.



posted on Oct, 12 2007 @ 03:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by seanm
You will just have to live with the fact that AA77 hit the Pentagon and no amount of your ridiculous evasions of the evidence will help you prove otherwise.

Consider coming on over to the side of Truth, JP.


I have not seen any facts that flight 77 hit the Pentagon. None of the parts found have ever been matched to Flight 77.

The truth is that you cannot provide any evidence to support the official story.


A with the others, you are having difficulty getting over your brainwashing that there is some kind of "official story."

Why do you keep repeating such nonsense, Ultima1? You KNOW it's pure baloney, don't you? Or does The Church of 9/11 Truth have such a powerful hold on your "beliefs?"



posted on Oct, 12 2007 @ 03:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by seanm
A with the others, you are having difficulty getting over your brainwashing that there is some kind of "official story."

Why do you keep repeating such nonsense, Ultima1? You KNOW it's pure baloney, don't you? Or does The Church of 9/11 Truth have such a powerful hold on your "beliefs?"


No, its my background and experience in aviation along with some common sense that tells me you cannot show any real evidence of Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon. No official reports or photos or videos to prove that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon.

Oh by the way i have the data from the Flight Data Recorder from flight 77. I unlike you have have done some real research and have filed a FOIA request with the NTSB to get the FDR data.

It is you that has been brainwashed by the media.

[edit on 12-10-2007 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Oct, 12 2007 @ 03:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by seanm
A with the others, you are having difficulty getting over your brainwashing that there is some kind of "official story."

Why do you keep repeating such nonsense, Ultima1? You KNOW it's pure baloney, don't you? Or does The Church of 9/11 Truth have such a powerful hold on your "beliefs?"


No, its my background and experience in aviation along with some common sense that tells me you cannot show any real evidence of Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon.


What you actually mean to say is that you have no experience in forensic investigation of aircraft accidents, you do not have a clue that the preponderance of evidence comes from multiple independent sources and NOT the government, that ALL of that evidence converges on the inescapable conclusion that what was known as it happened: AA77 hit the Pentagon.

For you to claim otherwise means you have to accomplish what all of you 9/11 Deniers specifically avoid doing: refuting all of that evidence and demonstrating what happened to AA 77 if it didn't hit the Pentagon.

You'd better stop whining and get to work. Craig Ranke and JP chickened out long ago.


No official reports or photos or videos to prove that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon.


Gosh, you really have a hard time understanding that one does not need photos or videos. I have never seen such a ridiculous assertion that because one does not have videos or photos that all of the other evidence doesn't count. Amazing.

No wonder 9/11 Truth is nothing more than an irrational religion.


Oh by the way i have the data from the Flight Data Recorder from flight 77. I unlike you have have done some real research and have filed a FOIA request with the NTSB to get the FDR data.


Given what you have written so far and that you are unable to say what happened to AA77, your claim is entertaining at best.


It is you that has been brainwashed by the media.


Yes, the last refuge of a 9/11 Denier.

Too bad for you that I and rational people rely on multiple sources and understand the nature of evidence which, by your very own admission, you demonstrate a complete lack of knowledge about.

The burden of proof remains on your shoulders, Ultima1. You'd better get to work.



posted on Oct, 12 2007 @ 04:24 PM
link   
The security camera footage is interesting, the video post I watched looked as though it was either sped up, or the camera did not take rolling video but consecutive stills. Would the people posting the videos comment on that?

I do see however, the triangular tail of an airplane. It is low, maybe even skidding on the ground. That object is on the "official trajectory". The subsequent explosion seems to coincide perfectly with the impact of the object and the building. The impact seems to be carrying toward the center of the pentagon as demonstrated by the fireball and the heavier debris(top left of explosion). The smaller debris is cast back against the trajectory as would be expected.

The wings of a 757 are sweeped back, the exact angle of which I am not certain, however it is not important. What is important is that they would fold back leaving a smaller hole than the original wingspan. That is undisputable physics, if in doubt consider a barbed arrow.

During my military service I have witnessed in person and in video crippled aircraft use this same trajectory while attempting emergency landings. Due to the shape of the belly they slid like a shuffle board puck and not until they lost significant momentum did they begin to leave notable damage to the surface. In fact they perform this procedure with speed up so they are still able to control the wings and avoid catching a tip and flipping.

What I see in the security cam vid with my own eyes is just what I have described to you.

The explosion in my opinion is too perfectly timed for someone to be using some sort of remote detonation. If the plane were the detonating device for explosives planted before hand, we would see the initial explosion(the plane) followed by an immediate secondary explosion(the planted explosives). I do not see this in the vid.

What I do find interesting is the apparent color of the tail section, it does appear blue or darker in color. If I am not mistaken American Flight 77 had the silver paint scheme, however if I recall correctly American Airlines did have a paint scheme where the tail was painted blue. I will look for pics.

I cannot say from that vid that that is flight 77, but it is an object that resembles an airplane.



posted on Oct, 12 2007 @ 04:43 PM
link   
I found the paint scheme I was thinking about, but it is U.S Airways. I down loaded it but I dont know how to upload it.



posted on Oct, 12 2007 @ 04:51 PM
link   


If this works, it looks the plane in the vid. Whos to say. It is interesting, but does not sway me at this point.



posted on Oct, 12 2007 @ 05:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by seanm
What you actually mean to say is that you have no experience in forensic investigation of aircraft accidents, you do not have a clue that the preponderance of evidence comes from multiple independent sources and NOT the government, that ALL of that evidence converges on the inescapable conclusion that what was known as it happened: AA77 hit the Pentagon.



I have aviation experience and can post evidence of it , but like most people that believe the offiical story you would not accept it, like you cannot accept people with intelligence actually doing research and proving your media fed theories wrong.

So i see you could not post any evidence of Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon. All talk and no evidence, just like a person who believes the offical story. Your so called multiple independent sources are just something made up.

I am still waiting for some actual evidence of Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon.

And you do not have to take my word for the FDR data, you can go to the NTSB webpage and file an FOIA. Unless you are afraid the data would prove you wrong.




[edit on 12-10-2007 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Oct, 12 2007 @ 05:23 PM
link   
Craig,
I have to commend you in one aspect, and that is that you seem to have really done the research that you claim. There are some who make the same claim but cannot produce. I do however believe it to be flawed and suggest to you that you have someone with knowledge in this area review your evidence before you are embarrassed. I thought you did an ok job in the interview linked here, given the fact that the host did not seem to take the time to prepare an questions of substance for you. All though it might be a blessing in that you avoided that embarrassment I mentioned.



posted on Oct, 12 2007 @ 05:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by wsamplet
Craig,
I have to commend you in one aspect, and that is that you seem to have really done the research that you claim. There are some who make the same claim but cannot produce.


I also have done the research, and i am still waiting for your evidence.



posted on Oct, 12 2007 @ 05:28 PM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


As Craig said in his interview google doesn't count. Merely agreeing with him is not evidence.



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join