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.
posted by Orion7911
Hey Preston... Can you believe these duhbunkers theory??? I haven't laughed this hard since,, well.. since 3 posts ago...
they're actually claiming that punch out hole was created by air pressure... Are they serious? Really? waypastvne?? You believe that?
Originally posted by rich23
Good grief. This is STILL going on?
For the hard of thinking... arguing over whether the passport could have survived the crash is irrelevant because all we have to go on is the word of an anonymous man in a suit.
Can anyone prove that this man in a suit was not planting evidence?
Can anyone prove that this man was not in the employ of the security services?
Because until you can, arguments about whether the passport could have survived or not are irrelevant.
It's pathetic, ignoring the same fatal flaw over and over again.
Originally posted by Orion7911
Originally posted by waypastvne
This is how I explain it
[edit on 22-9-2009 by waypastvne]
AIR PRESSURE?????
[edit on 23-9-2009 by Orion7911]
waypastvne doesn't seem to realize that since the cabin psi was lower than the psi outside the plane, it would have imploded, not the other way around.
Originally posted by SPreston
reply to post by ImAPepper
Personally I would never believe anything coming from either the FBI or the FBI Lab. Over a dozen FBI whistleblowers have confirmed this suspicion.
It lost credibility for me when it asked "What is holding up this [very heavy] airplane? That's right, air!" Lol. Not "lift" then.caused by an aerofoil moving through air?
It also gave the empty volume of air in the plane, not including flooring, wiring, seats, passengers, insulation, luggage, etc.
The fact that the holder of that passport turned up alive and well shows what utter tripe the official story is.
Originally posted by waypastvne
reply to post by JPhish
waypastvne doesn't seem to realize that since the cabin psi was lower than the psi outside the plane, it would have imploded, not the other way around.
Duh. The aft portion of the fuselage just forward of the pressure bulkhead imploded.
Take a really good look at the photo below. Notice how the armrests are imprinted in the aluminum below the windows. You can clearly see how edge failures are folded inward at the top and bottom of the piece of debris. It appears that the top of the fuselage collapsed inward folding the outer skin around the bottom of the overhead storage compartments. As the skin collapsed inward, it pressed against the line of armrests, leaving a visible series of creases. Further evidence of an implosion is the inward fold at the bottom edge of the debris.
Originally posted by JPhish
Last I checked, I made no mention of pieces of paper being unable to survive a space shuttles failed reentry into the atmosphere.
False analogy (1)
The events are not even comparable. There is no fire during a reentry, get your facts straight, there is only ablation.
If you drop a piece of paper from above the earths atmosphere it will make it down to earth without burning 99.9999999999999999% of the time. That .000000000000000000001 % being when it by chance grazes something HEAVY entering the atmosphere at high speeds; in which case it would only get singed and would not burn because there is insufficient amounts of oxygen to sustain a fire at those heights.
posted by hooper
Actually, the passport was not found in the rubble, it was found by an unidentified person and turned over to a NYPD detective a block or so from the WTC before the towers collapsed. Its in the 9/11 Commision Report.
It is reported that the passport of hijacker Satam Al Suqami has been found a few blocks from the World Trade Center. [ABC News, 9/12/2001; Associated Press, 9/16/2001; ABC News, 9/16/2001] Barry Mawn, the director of the FBI’s New York office, says police and FBI found it during a “grid search” of the area. [CNN, 9/18/2001] However a senior counsel to the 9/11 Commission later claims it was actually discovered by a passerby and given to an NYPD detective, “shortly before the World Trade Center towers collapsed.”
source
1) please show proof the pictures of aircraft debris are from UA175/AA11 and be sure to show matching serial numbers.
2) a scientific model or logical explanation with supporting academic evidence how AIR PRESSURE was responsible for punching that nice perfectly round hole out of the C RING.
any evasion and failure to do so is an automatic acceptance that you're either a shill, in denial or have no clue what you're talking about as I suspect.
There is no fire during a reentry, get your facts straight, there is only ablation.
Originally posted by hooper
In fact, which is more likely - the passport survived and was found or everyone in all levels of government is capable of being a cold blooded murderer?
this is a random picture with no time stamp that could have been taken at any time any where. Not to mention that everything you are saying is pure conjecture.
Originally posted by waypastvne
reply to post by JPhish
waypastvne doesn't seem to realize that since the cabin psi was lower than the psi outside the plane, it would have imploded, not the other way around.
Duh. The aft portion of the fuselage just forward of the pressure bulkhead imploded.
Take a really good look at the photo below. Notice how the armrests are imprinted in the aluminum below the windows. You can clearly see how edge failures are folded inward at the top and bottom of the piece of debris. It appears that the top of the fuselage collapsed inward folding the outer skin around the bottom of the overhead storage compartments. As the skin collapsed inward, it pressed against the line of armrests, leaving a visible series of creases. Further evidence of an implosion is the inward fold at the bottom edge of the debris.
Originally posted by Rewey
Originally posted by JPhish
Last I checked, I made no mention of pieces of paper being unable to survive a space shuttles failed reentry into the atmosphere.
False analogy (1)
The events are not even comparable. There is no fire during a reentry, get your facts straight, there is only ablation.
If you drop a piece of paper from above the earths atmosphere it will make it down to earth without burning 99.9999999999999999% of the time. That .000000000000000000001 % being when it by chance grazes something HEAVY entering the atmosphere at high speeds; in which case it would only get singed and would not burn because there is insufficient amounts of oxygen to sustain a fire at those heights.
Not comparable? No fire during re-entry?
This is what happened during the particular re-entry the other posters were referring to:
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/d8317fa49478.jpg[/atsimg]
well, fortunate for us, what you think isn’t reality.
I think a piece of paper surviving that catastrophe would have a similar chance as a piece of paper at the WTC. And yet it actually did, along with other flammable items.
the space shuttle did not explode, it was ripped apart.
People need to remember how explosions work. First comes the pressure wave, or shockwave. THEN comes the fireball/shrapnel.
sorry, but the delay between the initial shock-wave and the actual "fire" is negligible. The air is also hot enough to melt your face off.
To point it out clearly - look at video footage of atomic bomb tests. I realise this is a much larger scale, but as you can actually see the shockwave, it helps demonstrate it more clearly.
yes, many random items do survive plane crashes. In fact with most plane crashes, nearly the entirety of the planes parts can be salvaged. Not on 9-11 though. That day physics took the day off.
What can happen in explosions is certain random items within the plane can be projected by the pressure wave AHEAD of the resulting fireball.
absolutely. But not like the “plane crash" on 9-11.
This is why there are numerous cases of easily flammable objects surviving horrific plane crashes.
Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
OOOOkay..........no fire during a failed reentry. Yeah..........
Originally posted by waypastvne
1) please show proof the pictures of aircraft debris are from UA175/AA11 and be sure to show matching serial numbers.
Wreckage on top of WTC5
Originally posted by waypastvne
Wreckage on top of WTC5
Originally posted by waypastvne
N612UA cn 21873/41
Originally posted by waypastvne
2) a scientific model or logical explanation with supporting academic evidence how AIR PRESSURE was responsible for punching that nice perfectly round hole out of the C RING.
Can you think of anything else, besides air, that can weave its way through that maze of columns. A missle couldn't do that.
Originally posted by waypastvne
Originally posted by waypastvne
any evasion and failure to do so is an automatic acceptance that you're either a shill, in denial or have no clue what you're talking about as I suspect.
Yea I'm a shill. I get all the free gas I want and I don't have to pay any taxes. EAT YOUR HEART OUT.
[edit on 23-9-2009 by waypastvne]