Pentagon DNA Evidence....Is it Possible?

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by Disclosed
Thats funny. Your answer isnt anywhere on this thread at all.

I have answered your question on many other threads...

Please show me one thread where you answered the following question:

So you are saying there was no missile involved then, correct? Just a plane? Want to make sure everyone understands what you are saying...

just one thread.....show us just one of your many other threads that state that.

Do that and I will stop posting in this thread.

Otherwise you are lying. How can we debate anyone if they have to lie about what they have/have not posted?

Originally posted by Disclosed
Otherwise you are lying. How can we debate anyone if they have to lie about what they have/have not posted?

I have never stated anything about a misisle being used at the Pentagon (please try reading my post sometime before posting lies and misleading statements), this is the last post on this issue, or i will ask the mods to get involved.

Still waiting for any evidnece that flight 77 hit the Pentagon.


[edit on 10-4-2008 by ULTIMA1]

reply to post by ULTIMA1



See how easy that was? If you had stated that a dozen posts earlier, we wouldnt have dragged that out now.

Thats all I was asking. Thank you for yor answer.

Originally posted by Disclosed See how easy that was? If you had stated that a dozen posts earlier, we wouldnt have dragged that out now.

No, it was even easier if you would have read my post before posting lies.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

1. Eyewitness that could not agree what hit the Pentagon and where, and whose testimony would not hold up in court.

this i can agree with. eyewitnesses under duress make mistakes.

ive been saying the same thing about eyewitnesses at the wtc hearing "explosions" for a long time now. i have no doubt they heard loud noises and in telling people what they heard said "it sounded like an explosion" cuz many people will say that when describing a loud noise.

so yeah, in all available evidence the eyewitnesses should be near the bottom of the list of whats "good"

Originally posted by Damocles
this i can agree with. eyewitnesses under duress make mistakes.

Well its mainly because of all the disccrepanices in what they saw.

And the fact that 1 stated he did not see what hit the Pentagon he was told later it was a 757.

reply to post by ULTIMA1


How is asking you to post your link a lie?

I'm curious why you are so angry at me? I did not see where you believed a missile hit the pentagon or not. Rather than just answer my simple question, you started ranting about having already posted it a dozen times, but still could not provide one link where you actually did that.

If you have to have anger issues, thats all fine and good. But if you wish to debate, at least post your facts when asked. More sugar, less salt.

Originally posted by Disclosed
How is asking you to post your link a lie?

Because you lied about me stating a missile hit the Pentagon.

I always post facts when i post on a thread. You should try it sometime.



[edit on 10-4-2008 by ULTIMA1]

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by Disclosed
How is asking you to post your link a lie?

Because you lied about me stating a missile hit the Pentagon.

WTF?

Do you want me to link every post of mine in this thread? I never stated that you said a missile hit the pentagon. I was only asking if you DIDNT think a missile hit the pentagon, only a plane.

Nowhere did I state that you said a missile hit the pentagon.

I'll gladly link every single post of mine in this thread...and you will see that I didnt state that.

I'm curious why you are making up statements now?

I'll accept your apology anytime now. (like thats gonna happen)

edit - double post, a little laggy today. SOrry

[edit on 10-4-2008 by Disclosed]

reply to post by CaptainObvious

Amazing, because in previous docs released by the government ALL of the passengers had been identified by DNA. Nice anomaly.

Originally posted by Disclosed
I was only asking if you DIDNT think a missile hit the pentagon, only a plane.

Why would you ask me about a missile hitting the Pentagon if i never posted anything about a missile hitting the Pentagon?

In all fairness, what ultima actually said was:

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Well if i was going to hit the Pentagon i would have used a missile first to get through the reinfored walls

(snip)

The fly the plane in after the missile to cause maximum damage.

he was merely speculating about how HE would have done it. ive speculated before on how i would rig the towers for a CD but that doesnt mean i think it was a CD (pretty sure everyones clear on where i stand on that one)

i mean, if we're going to have a name calling, mud slinging fight about stuff lets have it about something more than a miscommunication about personal speculation yeah?

moving on....

reply to post by jprophet420


JP ..that's ALL you have to say? Please show me said document where the gobermint said the identified all bodies.

When are you leaving? When are you denouncing the Truth Movement?

I proved over and over that DNA Recovery was possible at the Pentagon crash.

It's now up to you to providence evidence that shows DNA would not be viable.

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
I proved over and over that DNA Recovery was possible at the Pentagon crash.

But no proof that the bodies from Flight 77 were in the Pentagon.,

Also the list of DNA IDs were made befoe the head of the DNA testing had the new tests from NIST that he requested.

[edit on 11-4-2008 by ULTIMA1]

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
But no proof that the bodies from Flight 77 were in the Pentagon.,

but, without a reasonable explaination of where the DNA DID come from then, doesnt process of elimination let us presume that the most likely place then was in fact from flt77?

Also the list of DNA IDs were made befoe the head of the DNA testing had the new tests from NIST that he requested.

but, since the bodies at the pentagon werent damaged/degraded to the degree that some of the bodies at the WTC site were, the new test was unnecessary for the pentagon site. ergo, it was likely possible that the bodies at the pentagon site were able to be identified by the existing tests available at the time.

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.

from a clinical standpoint, the Pentagon site was a pretty standard accident scene so existing testing was sufficient. and the new test for the WTC was needed ONLY for those bodies that suffered the most damage and, and this parts speculation, were not found until later in the cleanup operation after the tissues had been exposed to the elements the longest.

so, ill grant you that theres no proof that the dna was from the passengers of flt77, but you also have to grant theres no proof that it wasnt either

Originally posted by Damocles
but, without a reasonable explaination of where the DNA DID come from then, doesnt process of elimination let us presume that the most likely place then was in fact from flt77.

But do we know the bodies from Flight 77 were actually in the Pentagon?

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

But do we know the bodies from Flight 77 were actually in the Pentagon?

What is the alternative then? That the victims were mutilated/burned at a seperate location, DNA samples gathered there, and shipped to be identified?

Occam's Razor at its finest.

Originally posted by Disclosed
What is the alternative then?

The alternative is finding the truth.

reply to post by ULTIMA1


ooooookay.

So that must mean you think Flight 77's victims were NOT in the Pentagon then. But you have zero proof of this. And all the people that worked the scene were lying.

I see now.