Pentagon DNA Evidence....Is it Possible?

page: 4
4
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 17 2008 @ 04:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Spoodily


I would like to know why they 'reinforced' that particular section of the pentagon specifically and how vacant that area was to allow for such construction. It is the pentagon so I'm sure that there was still security in place to keep the construction workers contained in specific work areas. When I look at those pictures I see what looks more like a movie set rather than an actual wreckage site. Maybe the 'scene' was being built at the same time the other construction was being done. I think more pentagon people died in that 'crash' than airplane passengers.



Hi Spoodily,

Wedge 1 was under construction for many years (1998). I ask that you go here for updates on the Pentagon renovation project.
renovation.pentagon.mil...


Wedge 1 - The renovation of the five floors in Wedge 1, approximately 1 million square feet of space, began in 1998. The project included major structural demolition, installation of new utilities, and the build-out of tenant areas. A phased move-in of tenants began in February 2001. Wedge 1 is accessed by Corridors 3 and 4.


HEre is a link to the project information:
renovation.pentagon.mil...


You will see that private contractors are allowed to bid on jobs at the Pentagon. The same contractors that Craig Ranke accuses of planting explosives in the area they are renovating.

Here is a link for contractors can obtain information about registering.
renovation.pentagon.mil...




posted on Mar, 17 2008 @ 04:46 PM
link   
reply to post by SlightlyAbovePar
 


I posted pictures of some charred bodies that were presented as evidence in the Moussaoui trial. We should make planes out of people, they hold up great!



posted on Mar, 17 2008 @ 04:47 PM
link   
"No i didn't misunderstand it. I took your quote for what it was. Not to be a jerk... but one out of 64 does not equal 99%. 63 out of 64 were identified. Only the little 2 year old was not identified."


I dont understand what your trying to say here.. Im telling you 99% of the passengers and crew were identified, and you are saying that 64 of the 65 people were identified. Are we not in agreeance then? I still think you are confused.

And While i understand it is easy to pick pieces from posts and quote them, why dont you pick the parts of my post that are undeniable.

""Titanium vaporizes at temperatures well over 4000deg in fact its vaporization point is 425 kJ·mol−1 and Im guessing that a big number (the engines that were never found contained lots of titanium)
en.wikipedia.org...

Aluminum which the "plane" would have been mostly comprised of vaporizes at temperatures of 294.0 kJ·mol−1 (these numbers are staggeringly monstrously large.
en.wikipedia.org...

Human dna is completely destroyed at 200 deg..

Now you do the math, and run the probabilities of human DNA being recovered after temp of over 500 000 deg (which is impossible all its own) had vaporized 90% of the "plane".""

We are discussing the possibilities of IMPOSSIBILITY, do you understand?



posted on Mar, 17 2008 @ 04:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by SlightlyAbovePar

Thanks for replying but, your answers aren't to any questions I asked.

Unverifiable to whom? You? How can you make this claim? On what basis to make this claim? How is the DNA testing "unverifiable"?

Using the scientific method to determine government involvement in the event? What, exactly, are you talking about? What does the scientific method have to do with the principles involved?

You're not talking facts, your floating ideas and suppositions you consider fact(s).

Big difference.


It is unverifiable to everyone. If it wasn't you would be able to verify it but you can't.

Nobody can verify the legitimacy of this evidence.

You have no choice but to simply accept the word of the suspect.

That is completely illogical and if you do so it simply shows that you are willing base your claims that the government was not involved in the attack based on nothing but your faith in their word.

I don't doubt that you have faith on this level and that is certainly your prerogative but it goes against scientific principles when attempting to prove or disprove government involvement in the attacks.



posted on Mar, 17 2008 @ 04:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by talisman
reply to post by SlightlyAbovePar
 


I have to side with Craig. Clearly, the CIA is a murderous organization that has been involved with all kinds of nasty projects over the years. The U.S gov at one time planned "fake terrorism" in U.S cities, and there is involvement with Gladio which is "fake terrorism".

So to suspect the Gov, or the CIA is perfectly natural especially when you see they had no real interest in Bin laden, but Saddam and his OIL.

[edit on 17-3-2008 by talisman]


Great. I appreciate your opinions and views. I agree that the CIA being a natural suspect for bad things going on in the world is valid.

Only problem is, there is not one shred, not one thing that points to that theory being correct. Not a one.

I'm not dismissing you. If you provide something you think highlights a link between the CIA and 9-11 I'll be happy to talk about it.

[edit on 17-3-2008 by SlightlyAbovePar]



posted on Mar, 17 2008 @ 04:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
There is no where documented where anyone from the teams that were indentifying the remains at the Pentagon were looking for new methods. I


HEAT IS HEAT, AND HEAT DESTROYS DNA, IT DEOS NOT MATTER IF IT WAS AT WTC OR PENTAGON.

www.nist.gov...
In early November 2001, Dr. Robert Shaler, the director of the WTC DNA identification effort, contacted me and asked if I would be willing to develop some new DNA tests to help in the identification effort. I agreed to fast track our research efforts over the next several months and produce some test materials for his laboratory to try by January 2002.



posted on Mar, 17 2008 @ 04:53 PM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


How does heat destroy DNA? At what temperature needs to be reached to destroy DNA? How much body matter needs to be recovered, and in what state does it need to be in to test for DNA?

I know the answers to these questions, do you?



posted on Mar, 17 2008 @ 04:54 PM
link   
^ the simple fact that they planned terrorist attacks a long time ago is only public knowledge now. It was not know that they were planning it or were going to do it until decades later. So to ask for evidence of something that would obviously be ABOVE TOP SECRET (heh) less then a decade after it transpired is silly.



posted on Mar, 17 2008 @ 04:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Craig Ranke CIT
 


Craig... you have yet to answer the important questions..

ie:

You are accusing civilian contractors for planting bombs.

Civilian firefighters assisted in putting out the extensive fires.

In the gathering of DNA evidence. It was civilians that secured the collapsing areas and made them safe for search and resue efforts. It was civilians that searched for survivors (found none) but found bodies or remains. These civilians then called the FBI to photograph the remains. These civilians then removed the remains where the FBI again photographed them.... Civilians worked on gathering the evidence and assisted in identification of the remains.

You are claiming a government conspiracy and that they are the "perps" or the "suspects"... yet civilians were involved in prety much ALL aspects of the day and the days that followed.



posted on Mar, 17 2008 @ 04:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by SlightlyAbovePar
How does heat destroy DNA? At what temperature needs to be reached to destroy DNA? How much body matter needs to be recovered, and in what state does it need to be in to test for DNA?


I am going by the facts and evidence. In 2001 we did not have the testing to test the DNA. Unless you have evidecne to contridict the head of the DNA operation and NIST aim going to stick by the evidence i have.

www.nist.gov...
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.



[edit on 17-3-2008 by ULTIMA1]

[edit on 17-3-2008 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Mar, 17 2008 @ 04:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Retikx
 


Retikx... Get over yourself with the Operation Northwoods. It was one persons idea....it was rejected...and he was demoted. In addition, if you bothered to read the document, you will see that Americans were not going to die.



posted on Mar, 17 2008 @ 04:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Craig Ranke CIT
 


Again, thank you for your answer but, you didn't answer my questions.

If you're not able to answer you gain a whole lot more credibility by just answering truthfully from the get-go.

Continuing to talk when you clearly don't have any idea what your talking about only serves to shoot yourself in the foot.

You gave me a platitude and a theory of belief. Unfortunately, I asked specific questions in two different posts. Can you demonstrate any knowledge of any of the things I asked about?

Before you strawman that last sentence - you've made claims and I am asking you for something to support your claims, by you. Not claims made by someone else and your reference to those claims and supporting work. Your claims, from supposed first-hand knowledge and “serious investigation”.



posted on Mar, 17 2008 @ 04:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by SlightlyAbovePar
reply to post by Griff
 

Think about it; you're calling out someone's firsthand account because it doesn't fit within your pre-defined conclusion(s).


First of all, I'm not "calling out" anything. I'm asking questions.

It's a sorry state we are in when someone asks a question and at least three people have jumped down my throat now about it.

JEEZ. IT"S A FREEKING QUESTION!!!!!!!!



posted on Mar, 17 2008 @ 05:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1


www.nist.gov...
Due to the nature of the World Trade Center disaster


What DON'T you get???? The WTC collapse was different from the Pentagon. HAve you bothered to read the documents I posted? Have you seen the photographs of some of the victims at the Pentagon?



posted on Mar, 17 2008 @ 05:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by SlightlyAbovePar
I'm not dismissing you. If you provide something you think highlights a link between the CIA and 9-11 I'll be happy to talk about it.


Al Queda. Usama Bin Laden.

There. That's two.



posted on Mar, 17 2008 @ 05:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Griff
 


Griff... it's the questions your asking dude. Your WAY to smart asking such questions you KNOW the answer too. Thats why I was pissy with you. Sorry... I expect more.



posted on Mar, 17 2008 @ 05:04 PM
link   
reply to post by CaptainObvious
 


Again, that post was not directed to you plus that is the first time ive ever posted anything on this board about Op N woods, so you can go ahead and pull that size 8 out of your mouth now. ( i have a hunch your one of the typical post count= IQ twits)

And please feel free to discuss the post that i have directed to you twice now regarding the heat variation points of the common metals in planes, compared to dna.

Here so you dont have to work too hard to find it.
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Mar, 17 2008 @ 05:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Griff
 



Time for a History lesson Griff? When the Soviets invaded Afghanistan, The United states did fund the Afghans. Osama REFUSED funding from the United States.

the United states also armed Iraq during the Iran / Iraq war. We also Funded Iraq.......
it goes on and on. It does not mean that currently that they are our allies.



posted on Mar, 17 2008 @ 05:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Griff
 



As was I. I don't think my post was jumping down your throat. I asked - basically - how reasonable is the argument to begin with? That's all. I apologize if my post came across as a personal attack - not intended.

These discussions are so hard to maintain within the TOS because when someone states a belief as fact, how do you question the fact of the matter without questioning the belief and therefore questions the person who stated the belief as fact in the first place!?

It's a total catch-22.



posted on Mar, 17 2008 @ 05:08 PM
link   
reply to post by CaptainObvious
 



And the same heat that destroyed the remains at WTC would be the same heat that would have destroyed the DNA at the pentagon.

Or, if the heat wasn't as intense, where's the rest of that huge plane?





new topics
top topics
 
4
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join