Jet engine sim for testing 9/11 planes

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

The deris could be from anything, the parts is what would prove if and what plane hit the pentagon.

This is proof enough for me of an AA airplane at the Pentagon....



This is an enlargement f the center section of the following photo just below the BURNING JET FUEL!



Again - these photos are officially creditied to a DOD photographer.

You can download the full resolution image on this page....

www.defenselink.mil...

Also if you had done any reaserch you would know that the FBI confiscated all photos taken at the Pentagon.

If this is true how do you explain the photos on the web page I provided above?

Continue to move the bar and change the direction of the discussion all you like.

How does that sim prove no airplane again?

reply to post by ULTIMA1


ULTIMA....no disrespect, but.....

I have seen quite a few photos, just from the aftermath of the Pentagon hit, by AAL 77.....

Do you wish to tell the ATS audience that all of those fuselage fragments were 'planted', in order to support the paranoia theory?

I can predict your response....no dis-respect....but you will spout something about the 'crime scene', and how the FBI won't release the info....so that, in your mind, equals a 'conspiracy'.....

Before you go off on that tangent....why not look into the children who were on AAL77? Kids from the Inner City, here in DC.....why not focus on them???? For a change....

I mean, we're adults, mostly....posting our opinions on a forum...about an event that probsbly doesn't impact our lives (impacted mine....but let's keep that out for the moment)

I want to re-focus on those children....I am crying for them, as I write this.

sorry....can't write....anymore

Originally posted by darkbluesky
This is proof enough for me of an AA airplane at the Pentagon....

What proof is thier that its an AA airplane? If it is an AA plane, what plane is it?

Originally posted by weedwhacker
I have seen quite a few photos, just from the aftermath of the Pentagon hit, by AAL 77.....

Do you have an official source with informatoin that proves it was AA 77?



[edit on 8-5-2008 by ULTIMA1]

Originally posted by ULTIMA1 What proof is thier that its an AA airplane?

Well, the colors match the AA fuselage finish scheme.

If it is an AA plane, what plane is it?

I'd have to say it's this one....



I'm certain it's N644AA since that's the one that was tracked by radar turning back to DC that day. It was the one that hasn't been seen since, the one that took off from Dulles on 9/11 with a crew and passengers that haven't been seen since. The one identified by the DFDR recovered from the Pentagon...etc.

Oh..almost forgot..how does that engine sim prove there was no airplane?

reply to post by darkbluesky


ULTIMA.....


your continuing efforts to obfuscate are becoming more apparent....send flowers to ou Mother!!!

WW

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
What proof is thier that its an AA airplane? If it is an AA plane, what plane is it?

What proof is there that it's not an AA airplane? If it is not an AA place, what plane is it?

Originally posted by darkbluesky
Well, the colors match the AA fuselage finish scheme.

I'm certain it's N644AA since that's the one that was tracked by radar turning back to DC that day.

What evidnece is their that the colors match. I am still waiting for any real official reports or evindece, not just opinions.

You mean tracked all but for the time it was off radar.




[edit on 8-5-2008 by ULTIMA1]

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
What evidnece is their that the colors match. I am stil lwating for any real official reports or evindece, not just opinions.

What evidence is there that the colours do not match. I am still waiting for any real official reports or evidence, not just opinions.

Originally posted by _Del_

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
What proof is there that it's not an AA airplane? If it is not an AA place, what plane is it?

The proof is the same it has been since day 1.

NO OFFICIAL FBI REPORTS THAT PROVE IT WAS FLIGHT 77.

NO ACTUAL SOURCED EVIDENCE THAT PROVE IT WAS FLIGHT 77.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
The proof is the same it has been since day 1.

NO OFFICIAL FBI REPORTS THAT PROVE IT WAS FLIGHT 77.

NO ACTUAL SOURCED EVIDENCE THAT PROVE IT WAS FLIGHT 77.

The proof is the same (that?) it has been since day 1.

NO OFFICIAL FBI REPORTS THAT PROVE IT WAS NOT FLIGHT 77.

NO ACTUAL SOURCED EVIDENCE THAT PROVES IT WAS NOT FLIGHT 77.

I still haven't seen any evidence that it was not Flight 77 like you stated.


[edit on 8-5-2008 by _Del_]

Originally posted by _Del_
I still haven't seen any evidence that it was not Flight 77 like you stated.

If you believe Flight 77 hit the Pentagon its on you to prove it. I have proven reasonable doubt that it was not flight 77.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by _Del_
I still haven't seen any evidence that it was not Flight 77 like you stated.

If you believe Flight 77 hit the Pentagon its on you to prove it. I have proven reasonable doubt that it was not flight 77.

If you believe Flight 77 did not hit the Pentagon it's on you to prove it. I have proven reasonable doubt that it was Flight 77.

No spectators were killed or missing (blown away) in the aftermath of this picture.



www.jetphotos.net...


Note the "dirty" configuration that should result in massive turbulence according to the OP. Also, the plane is flying slow, which should result in larger measurable jet blast.

And we've come full circle again!

Don't hold your breath, _Del_. It's clear that Ultima refuses to learn anything at all about the science of aircraft flight. He knows how to fix airplanes, so that makes him the expert in aerodynamic principles and theories.

It's a shame the full picture doesn't fit. It's a beauty. It's also a 757, which seems atleast as relevant as an engine sim using a different engine proving the plane should have crashed in less than two seconds based on an overheat warning.
It certainly appears he's parroting the sites, as he does very poorly at communicating a thought when "off-script"


[edit on 8-5-2008 by _Del_]

Haha, very true. I've seen that picture before and yeah, it's huge!

The one thing I wished Ultima would do is actually address the points in my posts. If he would just do some actual research into my posts, he would find them to be very valid.

Instead, he either ignores them (because I believe he thinks that if he acknowledges them, then that gives them validity), or he throws a one-liner that both picks at the simplest explanation I give and insults me at the same time.

He even went as far as demanding that I post my education and my experience working on aircraft. Which I did for him and promptly removed it once he replied back (but he ignored it as usual).

I would now like him to post his education and experience designing an aircraft completely from scratch. Notice I said design, not fix.

[edit on 8-5-2008 by HLR53K]

Originally posted by _Del_
No spectators were killed or missing (blown away) in the aftermath of this picture.

Talk about cherry picking evidence.

Still wating for any real evidence to debate my posts.

[edit on 9-5-2008 by ULTIMA1]

Well, I certainly haven't seen any to debate mine. In fact, I've seen very little off of your script.

Originally posted by _Del_
Well, I certainly haven't seen any to debate mine. In fact, I've seen very little off of your script.

How much more do i need to post?

I mean i know its hard for believers to believe anything but what they are told by the media and TV.