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.

 

G Force calculations prove official Pentagon attack flight path impossible

page: 6
40
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 18 2008 @ 04:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Reheat
 


All I see you do is attack his character than disprove his data.

Disprove his data instead of using typical baiting behavior to detract from the thread.

Even if your initial post is correct, then WHY HAVE THEY NOT RELEASED THE VIDEOS PROVING THE GOVT THEORY? That alone stinks to high heaven and anyone with half a brain can put the two likely scenarios together.



Originally posted by tezzajw

Originally posted by acura_el2000
The math might be correct that it would need 34G's to pull out, but there is no need for the plane to do so, as it would just deflect off the ground, and ram into the Pentagon anyway.

Wow, really?

What evidence do you have that the plane would have deflected from the ground if it was not pulled out of the dive it was in?


You're forgetting that magical pentalawn. The plane clearly bounced off it. It's teflon coated pentanium grass or something? And the pentanium cable spools which were untouched in front of the impact also...


P.s. lovely pic there Craig with the untouched pentanium cable spools


Nice post again and keep it up. Govt theory has officially fallen to bits. Just like WTC1 and 2.. and 7.. and the pentagon.




posted on Sep, 18 2008 @ 04:47 PM
link   
question.

Why don't the investigators and govt. release the at least dozen or so security cam footage that would have surely shown a plane crashing into the pentagon? Why?

maybe cause the footage doesn't show a plane hitting the pentagon.


why does the damage to the pentagon not look like aircraft damage.

whats with the hole on the other side.

Why did the "plane" act more like a cruise missile than a plane. not saying a plane didn't hit the pentagon since I don't fly planes or know exactly what maneuvers one could pull of.

Following occam's razor wouldn't a cruise missile fit the evidence better than a large aircraft doing some extremely unlikely maneuvers. wouldn't it be simple for planted first responders to drop of a paltry amount of aircraft parts and claim an aircraft did it.

This wouldn't be the first time america has thought about attacking it's self in a false flag operation to further a shady agenda now would it?



posted on Sep, 18 2008 @ 05:01 PM
link   
Okay, I'll keep an open mind and explore this. Here a couple of things nagging me:

1) I can't tell ANYTHING about the projectile from the single still frame video, but I do see a HUGE fireball. I'm not an expert, but this fireball looks like something you would see on a special effects set...fuel based. I read that one of the leading theories is a cruise missile. Would a cruise missile detonate upon impact, mushroom into a HUGE fire ball on the outside of the building, and yet continue to penetrate through several layers of steel and concrete?

2)If it was a small commuter plane, 8-10 passengers, why use that instead of just using the 757? I know someone out there is going to say they flew the plane and the people to an undiclosed location where they have been holding them against their will, performing experiments on them. With all of the transient people in this country, if the government did, or had the need to pluck people for experiments, I would think there would have to be an easier way,

3) I'm not sure what you meant about the eyewitness accounts...and some people being on the other side of the building. I will have to read more,

4) I watched a documentary and re-creation of the impact on the outside wall that de-bunked the conspiracy theory. Essentially, the outer, and sturcturally weaker extremities of the plane liquified upon entry. The concept reminds me of the molten copper weapons being used by Iran against our troops in Iraq. Basically, a shaped charge explodes behind a cone of solid copper. The energy released instantly liquifies the copper and propels it outwards in a very focused beam. This beam can penetrate several inches of heavily reinforced armor on military vehicles. Would a plane weighing hundreds of thousands of pounds flying hundreds of miles per hour not have enough kinetic energy to reproduce the same effect? That would explain the outer wound and the penetration (with smaller diamter holes) in the inner layers.

5) With so much controversy surrounding this issue, I am surprised to find out that there are other videos (allegedly...but I find it hard to belive there wouldn't be...highway cameras, gas station cameras, hotel cameras, etc...) and they haven't been released. Hmmmm....



posted on Sep, 18 2008 @ 05:06 PM
link   
reply to post by dariousg
 


You must be confused about the history of how Hussein supported terrorism. [Let’s start with money. At a minimum, we know that Saddam Hussein’s government supported terrorism by paying "bonuses" of up to $25,000 to the families of Palestinian homicide bombers. How do we know this? Tariq Aziz, Hussein's own deputy prime minister, was stunningly candid about the Baathist government’s underwriting of terrorist killings in Israel.] www.husseinandterror.com...



posted on Sep, 18 2008 @ 05:25 PM
link   
The explosion looks pretty darned big. it shoots stuff up 120 feet into the air. big stuff like that large junk it blows over the roof of the pentagon. I don't think a fuel fireball will have the force to lift something that large that high. fuel fireball are large and the billow out a lot but this explosive looks more focused. The smoke is dark. evidence of an intense heat.

Whats with the contrail behind the "plane" it looks more like the exhaust of a missile. in front of it if you look very carefully you will see a small object. a little too small to be any airplane of any size.

what 757 can travel so fast that it's not visible in the footage. Wouldn't it it's self launch a lot of debris not a clean fireball?

Not a demolitions expert but I bet one that wasn't paid off would agree that it doesn't look a whole lot like a plane crashing, more like the footage of missiles hitting the side of ships, and buildings.

frankly I'm amazed that people would rather put their heads in the sand and hide from the fact that something very shady went on with the attack on the pentagon.



posted on Sep, 18 2008 @ 07:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Craig Ranke CIT
 


Sarcasm noted about bringing evidence of mass murder to a court.
I guess everytime I think that you cant get any lower you surprise me!



posted on Sep, 18 2008 @ 07:20 PM
link   
reply to post by fleabit
 


They serve the CIT koolaid at the next CIT treefort meeting.
If you drink it you will understand him better.



posted on Sep, 18 2008 @ 07:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
reply to post by apex
 


Ok good.

Glad to hear it!

Thanks for helping to spread the word regarding this important evidence proving the war on terror fraudulent.

WOW!
In addition to claming that
1) Flight 77 flew up and over the pentagon
2) civilian contractors planted explosives at the Pentagon
3) plane parts were planted
4) body parts were planted
5) DNA planted
6) Light poles moved/planted

You are not claiming that you video single handidly proves "the war on terror fraudulent".
Tell that to the rest of the world.
Wow dude you have balls.



posted on Sep, 18 2008 @ 07:32 PM
link   
Having spent quite a while reading this thread, I'm going to pin my colours to the mast and ask quite a simple question:

Where did the two Rolls Royce RB211-534E4 jet engines go to?

These RB211-535E4 jet engines weigh 7,264lbs each (that's 3.3 metric tonnes for our Euro-bretheren) without mounts, cowling etc., and they were approximately 62 feet apart. They were NOT made of copper. They were made largely of Titanium.

The intake fan at the front is made of Titanium alloy, as is the Thrust Reverser. The intermediate Compressor is made of Aluminum, whilst the high pressure section near the intense heat of the Combustor, and the Combustion Chamber itself, are made of Titanium Nickel alloys. The light-but-strong Turbine Blades are made of nickel-titanium-aluminum alloys.

Commercial-grade Titanium has an ultimate tensile strength of around 63,000 psi, and a melting point of 1,649 °C or 3,000 °F, though it loses strength when heated above 430 °C or 800 °F

Whilst I'm not so stupid as to expect the plane's impact to leave a Tom and Jerry-type perfect outline on this recently reinforced section of the Pentagon, we are expected to believe that the plane came in at an acute angle relative to the front elevation of the building.

I've seen the photos of the entry hole between the 1st and 2nd floors BEFORE the 65-foot wide section finally collapsed, and I am absolutely 100% sure that there was just the one famous 12-16 foot wide hole where the fuselage entered. Nowhere could I see either to the left or the right of the main hole where the two engines would have slammed into the building facade.

Arguably, allowing for the angle of approach, the starboard engine's impact point could easily have been masked by the generalised damage to the facade and would be expected to be found roughly 20 - 25 feet to the right of the main impact hole, but by the same token the port engine's impact point would have been about 40 feet to the left of the main entry hole.

I've looked and looked at all the photos taken of those first 45 minutes, and not one single shot shows anything like a plausible engine impact site, either on the port or starboard.

I can fully appreciate that much of the lighter materials may have vaporized either fully or partially and the momentum carried much of the rapidly-softening mass of the object inside the building, but I find it incredulous that two huge, solidly built titanium alloy jet engines could not only liquefy on impact and not leave their own blatantly obvious entry holes, or at the very, very least a highly visible impact mark. A huge liquidy splash. A huge scorch.

There was nothing like that seen, and I would love it if someone could explain to me how these engines never even left a mark. Seriously. Humour me...

And finally, just to fan the fires of dissent a little more, I have to say that if the Bush Cabal had definitive, unequivocable, idiot-proof proof of a Boeing 757 hitting the Pentagon, and if they had an honest bone in their collective bodies and actually wanted to calm this damaging, divisive speculation which has done nothing but hurt your country both internally and externally, they would have produced it a long time ago. Claiming that the Pentagon video footage from the cameras mounted along the roof-top and all the quickly confiscated cam footage from the surrounding areas is still classified is more than absurd. It's positively unfathomable, and is therefore completely and utterly unbelievable.

If events happened the way the government says it happened, they would have offered a huge amount of collaborative data to the entire world to prove their case. They did not do this. Instead they immediately started lying and classifying everything they could to PREVENT properly informed, transparent forensic examination by scientists, engineers, academics and the public.

Had they done so, there would be virtually no insultingly-labelled Conspiracy Theories, and everyone would be on the same side.

[edit on 18/9/2008 by jupiter1uk]



posted on Sep, 18 2008 @ 09:30 PM
link   
Pffft and CIT, I'm sure your mothers are very proud of you.

Here's what has been accomplished and all that's been proven.

1. My initial suspicions were correct in that you have managed to convince a group of like minded Conspiracy Theorists that this video is REVOLUTIONARY and somehow proves the generally accepted version of events at the Pentagon on 9/11 are wrong. It doesn't.

2. Because of the above it has given CIT an additional outlet to spew their garbage with renewed vigor because they believe the above.

3. You have proven that these Conspiracy Theorists who have swallowed this fraud are easy to deceive with manipulative math and distorted technical information regarding the FDR for AA77.

Here's how you've done it....

1. The math formula is a curvature vector type formula. By manipulating the radius of the arc of the pull up to make it as small as possible you are able to show INCREDIBLE G Forces. It is NOT NECESSARY to fly the descent and the pull up in that manner. The pull up could have been much more gradual as the original math by R. Mackey and Myraid showed.

Here are two threads showing how the maneuver could be done:

forums.randi.org...
forums.randi.org...

2. You pretend to know the precise location of AA77 when, in fact, you don't. Also, you ignore that there are several seconds of data missing from the FDR. I've already explained that the quick flight path study done by the NTSB calculated an incorrect impact time because all of the radar data available now was not available to them at the time of their analysis done for the FBI. The NTSB did not do their normal Accident Investigation because AA77 was NOT AN ACCIDENT. They only did a simple study for the FBI.

It is fair criticism to say that the FBI/NTSB should correct the impact time and confirm the missing data, however due to pffft's hostile and adversarial approach toward those agencies it may never be done. None of this in any way implies an InSiDe jOb.

In essence, this video accomplishes nothing, but to put money in the pockets of charlatans and frauds. It changes nothing regarding the basic proven 9/11 scenario at the Pentagon with it's mountain of corroborating physical evidence.


[edit on 19-9-2008 by Reheat]



posted on Sep, 18 2008 @ 10:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Reheat
It is fair criticism to say that the FBI/NTSB should correct the impact time and confirm the missing data, however due to pffft's hostile and adversarial approach toward those agencies it may never be done.

What the hell? Are you for real?

You're stating that two government agencies might not fix errors because they have been hounded by an independent group of civillians?

Seriously, you might want to rethink that statement.

If there are errors, then the government agencies should be duty-bound to correct them, regardless of any criticism that they receive.

This isn't supposed to be a game played out in a school yard. These agencies owe it to the people to present the truth.

This was a crime scene where innocent people died, it's not a game of 'sticks and stones may break my bones but names will never hurt me'.



posted on Sep, 18 2008 @ 11:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Reheat

The pull up could have been much more gradual as the original math by R. Mackey and Myraid showed.



Mackey's own calculations show that it would have to sustain a constant 4 g's for 4 seconds yet the FDR doesn't show anywhere near that!

Are you not paying attention here?

What don't you get?

Why do you think you get to ignore the values reported by the NTSB?

There is no "more gradual" pull up shown in the data that could explain the required descent. In fact the FDR does not show and has not recorded any positive load required to gradually pull out of this dive. In fact, it shows less than 1 G for that segment which represents a "pushing forward" motion on the yoke, as seen in the animation reconstruction provided by the NTSB, instead of a "pulling level" motion required.

So no, your hypothetical scenarios are not reconcilable with the official data so they mean nothing.

You MUST make your official fantasy fit within the official data yet you can not because it is impossible.

Again, even Mackey calculated a necessary CONSTANT 4 g's all the way from the VDOT antenna to the Pentagon wall but the FDR only shows an average of 1.17 g's for that segment!

Huge difference. Irreconcilable.

This means that your number one head scientist/debunker, Ryan Mackey, LIED when he concluded that based on his calculations of a necessary constant 4'g's sustained for the final 4 seconds that "there is no case to be made that the FDR data is inconsistent with the impact of Flight 77".


4 g's is NOWHERE to be seen in the FDR at all!

He's been fully exposed yet here you are still touting his lie.

Ask him if he will admit he was wrong and retract or if he will continue allow this utterly false claim of his to prove him a liar.



posted on Sep, 18 2008 @ 11:40 PM
link   
reply to post by tezzajw
 


God that is such a great post tezz.

It really exposes the difference in mentality and the incredible levels of psychological conditioning that we are dealing with here.

It's the worst attack on American soil that is justification for permanent global war yet when the government is beyond secretive with an utter lack of disclosure and blatant cover-up of evidence......Reheat thinks the citizens are at fault for demanding a response to fatal anomalies in what little bit of data that was released.

Amazing.



posted on Sep, 19 2008 @ 01:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT

Originally posted by Reheat

The pull up could have been much more gradual as the original math by R. Mackey and Myraid showed.



Mackey's own calculations show that it would have to sustain a constant 4 g's for 4 seconds yet the FDR doesn't show anywhere near that!

Are you not paying attention here?



Here you go again.

All of the calculations in the bamboozle video are based upon impact time. Wrong impact time, wrong conclusions. I've said it enough that you should be able to comprehend it after a dozen or more times.

You're the one not paying attention. Here's R. Mackey's original calculation and his initial response to this new "stuff".

Here is his original calculations:

forums.randi.org...

Here's his response to the new "stuff" in a discussion with a pffft minion.

forums.randi.org...

You accuse him of lying because you don't have a clue what this is all about. You're simply a parrot of Cap'n BoB.




[edit on 19-9-2008 by Reheat]



posted on Sep, 19 2008 @ 01:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
reply to post by tezzajw
 


God that is such a great post tezz.

It really exposes the difference in mentality and the incredible levels of psychological conditioning that we are dealing with here.


The usual drivel from a terrorist apologist.

Don't try to embellish my response beyond anything more than the impact time and missing FDR data for AA77. My response does not apply to any other issue regarding the attacks of 9/11.

Conspiracy theorists are the only ones concerned about this issue. It will change NOTHING whether the FBI/NTSB corrects the impact time or not. Well, if they corrected this it might cause the Pentacon and Pffft to lose DVD sales, but other than that it is NOT IMPORTANT.

Pffft and their hostile demands to the NTSB are not ordinary citizens. Pffft has blatantly implied the NTSB is complicit in MASS MURDER. I have worked for two different Government Agencies and I'll openly tell you that if you accused me of complicity in MASS MURDER you'll get nothing for the next 1000 years. It would take Congressional Action and even then you would only get the minimum information specifically required.

While it is true the Government is supposed to work for the people, in today's society that is pretty idealistic. If any agency of the Government responded to every malcontent, nitwit who demanded information, they would get little else done. That is the very reason they implemented the FOIA concept.

You don't send an email to a Government Agency or you don't "cold call" to someone and expect to get what you want. You certainly do not refer them to a stupid "News Release" (assuming pompous self importance). You do a well researched and well written technical paper on your work and your findings and send that along with a FOIA request if it's appropriate. Pffft, on the other hand has "cold called" NTSB people and sent them hostile emails while referring to stupid pompous "News Releases".

In essence, it's not surprising that they have gotten the responses they have. It's my guess that they've now "poisoned the well" and will never get anything more than a hard time from them. Too bad, it could have turned out differently and you wouldn't have wasted part of your lives on this nonsense.



posted on Sep, 19 2008 @ 01:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
Why do you think you get to ignore the values reported by the NTSB?


Simply because I'm not a silly drone. I've posted the fact that all of the data now available WAS NOT available to the NTSB at the time of their SIMPLE analysis for the FBI.

The NTSB is not GOD, you know. While they are one of the most respected agencies in the world in the Accident Investigation field, they WERE NOT the lead investigator in this instance. They merely did what the FBI asked them to do in a short period of time.

If they had done a full Accident Investigation, I'm sure the results would have been more accurate with regard to the impact time and the missing data.

Only Conspiracy Theorists make a big deal about this anyway. It's very funny and quite ironic that you accuse them of complicity in the attacks when it suits your fantasies, and then pretend they are God if it's to your advantage. That is indeed ironic and funny as hell. The laugh is on you!

The FDR is fake anyway, isn't it?



posted on Sep, 19 2008 @ 02:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Reheat
The usual drivel from a terrorist apologist.

Be very careful with the personal remarks. They're not required.



It will change NOTHING whether the FBI/NTSB corrects the impact time or not.

So, you're happy to accept that the official story is not correct and contains errors? Are you willing to admit that the investigations could have been better and should not have had errors in them?



I have worked for two different Government Agencies and I'll openly tell you that if you accused me of complicity in MASS MURDER you'll get nothing for the next 1000 years. It would take Congressional Action and even then you would only get the minimum information specifically required.

I just hope that people in government agencies with that sort of an attitude are merely paper pushers and not decision makers.

As I stated earlier - government agencies should not be in a position where they play name-calling games. They are accountable to 'we the people'.



While it is true the Government is supposed to work for the people, in today's society that is pretty idealistic.

Does that open the possibility that the government investigations were not 'for the people' and were conducted to their own agenda?

The second that a government agency is not 'for the people', you can toss out all belief about democracy and transparency. You might as well have a group of self-serving criminals in charge, if they are not working 'for the people'.

While I sincerely hope that people with your attitude are not in positions of power, I'm too much of a realist to know that they are. Your post shows an amazing acceptance that government agencies can and should do what they like, without any accountability to 'we the people'.

It's frightening to know that people think that way.



posted on Sep, 19 2008 @ 02:28 AM
link   
Your response validates the very reason that I did not respond directly to you in the first place. You have taken my words and twisted them to mean what you want them to mean, not what I actually said.

That's why you're a Conspiracy Theorist.

I am not going to waste my time saying it all again as you'll just misinterpret again.

If you're a young man, I can perhaps forgive you until you learn, but if you're not, well..... Have a nice day.



posted on Sep, 19 2008 @ 05:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Craig Ranke CIT
 



I'm just your average joe who doesn't believe anything until he see's it. So far neither side has convinced me... and until the government releases the CITGO footage I won't believe anyone.

I wonder, has anyone spoken to employees of that gas station who might have seen something? Either way, the government lost lots of it trustworthiness when it took that tape and surpressed it. Now we can never fully know what happened or trust our government to explain it to us.

If the government is innocent it was really stupid of them to keep that tape.



posted on Sep, 19 2008 @ 06:44 AM
link   
I see Reheat hasnt read the NTSB Flight Path Study or Time Correlation Summary regarding how the NTSB precisely calculated an "impact" time. Why am i not surprised, after all, he he didnt even know the pinned lat/long came from ReadOut2 from the FDR! Reheat, how many times can you be wrong in one thread?

Reheat also doesnt realize that if the NTSB publishes "missing seconds", they are going to have L3 all over them considering FDR's are built to not exceed more than a 0.5 second buffer lag from sensor to Crash Protected Memory. Reheat isnt too bright folks... The best was when hs buddy Beachnut fabricated a theory that the FDR loses power at 0.2 G... too funny.

I also see Reheat has been thoroughly discredited once again while attacking everyone else. Tisk tisk ReTreat. I especially like the "terrorist apologist" jab. Geee, have you informed the FAA? No? Why am i not surprised. Your desperation and frustration are so transparent.


Reheat, remember when you said others will figure out why you remain anonymous if i keep posting...? Well, it appears others have figured out why you remain anonymous and never put your name to your claims as you keep posting. Each post you make discredits your disposable internet UserID a little bit more. Keep up the good work!


Bottom line, ReTreat and his cohorts feel they know more than the NTSB, feel the NTSB data is littered with errors, accept the NTSB/FBI providing what Govt Loyalists claim is "error filled data" through the FOIA to the American public, refuse to contact the NTSB, refuse to contact L3, refuse to put their name on their claims, and blame P4T for the NTSB not correcting their data!

Lets not forget all North side witnesses are mistaken, lying and/or hallucinating... according to ReTreat and his cohorts.

Can i have some of what that guy is smoking?


It must really suck when govt data throws "debunkers" under the bus.. huh?


Yeah, we all know why you remain anonymous ReTreat.


Have a great day!

Rob


typo

[edit on 19-9-2008 by johndoex]




top topics



 
40
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join