9/11 facts - weigh in - OS VS others, page 1
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 9 times


reply posted on 29-1-2010 @ 07:41 PM by truthquest
reply to post by Thermo Klein


You only scratch the surface of the strange "impossibilities" that occured on 9/11. Regarding what you covered though, there was a team of college students who simulated the plane going into the Pentagon. They had to omit the engines from the plane simulation because they couldn't fit the plane into the building without doing so. The engine should have severely scraped the ground before punching the foundation of the building very hard, probably enough to crack it really good. No scrape marks can be seen in the lawn, and so that didn't happen.

That doesn't mean a plane didn't crash into the Pentagon... it only means a large jumbo jet did not crash into the Pentagon.

Just to correct you though, at least one of the black boxes was recovered... the one from the Pentagon. But data released by the NTSB is not even close to being compatible with the damage path... it even lists the pilot cabin door as "closed" the entire flight.


reply posted on 31-1-2010 @ 03:29 PM by Thermo Klein
reply to post by truthquest


I agree there are TONS more impossible facts but these very few I listed are pretty hard to deny. Wonder why a few days went by and only 3 responses? No ammunition for the flamers.

It's been shown, based on numerous, very credible eye-witnesses that "the plane" did not take the path elicited by the black box info allegedly belonging to a plane that hit the Pentagon. It's also been shown that the path they say it took is PHYSICALLY (Laws of Physics) impossible. I'll say that again... the trajectory/path of the plane DID NOT HAPPEN THAT WAY - it is not possible based on the weight and physical make-up of the plane.
The black box they allegedly have didn't belong to an airplane that hit the Pentagon, so my claim still stands.


reply posted on 31-1-2010 @ 03:38 PM by ANOK
reply to post by dereks


Oh dear, and you ignore all the other points and focus on something completely irrelevant to the grand scheme of things...

Locked cabin doors do not make buildings defy physics.



reply posted on 31-1-2010 @ 03:48 PM by seethelight
reply to post by Thermo Klein


1) That's not actually true.

The hole was huge and the walls were scorthed on either side for meters... there's no missile that BOTH explodes on impact AND drills into a building and exploded.... but the damage at the Pentagon was three rings deep... that's incredible.

2) All those people got wrong info and passed it on.

I seem to remember hundreds of media outlets around the world reporting that Saddam, had WMDs....

The media wants to be the first to break news... and many people repeat slalcious gossip, especially if others suddenly think the repeaters are special and interesting... in other words, repeating hoaxs can make you the centre of attention (The ATS motto)

3) So. Did you see the damage?

4) That's been explained by dozens of scientists... use google.


reply posted on 31-1-2010 @ 05:25 PM by Thermo Klein
reply to post by seethelight







There are a few pictures of the damage shown before the media got ahold of them. These clearly show the main wall collapse but no damage to the ground and no airplane wreckage.

For clarification, I never implied it was a missile, explosives, a smaller plane, etc. I'm very simply stating that it was NOT a Boeing 757 as the media told us on 9/11/2001.


[edit on 31-1-2010 by Thermo Klein]


reply posted on 31-1-2010 @ 06:18 PM by Thermo Klein
Originally posted by seethelight
reply to post by Thermo Klein
4) That's been explained by dozens of scientists... use google.


I assume you're addressing my #4 - that it takes 3000 degrees Fahrenheit to soften steel but the Twin Towers only got to around 1100 degrees.

That's simple physics, your argument of "use google" ... well
I found this on Google once - it's 1,000 Engineers, Scientists, and Demolition experts all backing the story that explosives were used.
www.ae911truth.org


reply posted on 31-1-2010 @ 06:58 PM by ANOK
reply to post by dereks


All three building on that day collapse globally through the path of most resistance, supposedly from carbon based fires.

That is defying physics, and if you don't understand why you need to go through a few 9-11 threads and catch up with the discussion, because I'm not going to repeat the information you need to understand my point just to make you happy in this thread.

Locked cabin doors have NO relevance to the buildings collapses, which is the ultimate conspiracy, no?

[edit on 1/31/2010 by ANOK]


reply posted on 31-1-2010 @ 07:03 PM by Sean48
reply to post by ANOK


There are some OS people who can relate to the science.

Then there are some , one, who stamps his foot and yells, Lies

I enjoy your postings Anok.

I am learning from them,


reply posted on 31-1-2010 @ 07:08 PM by TrickoftheShade
Originally posted by ANOK
reply to post by dereks



Locked cabin doors have NO relevance to the buildings collapses, which is the ultimate conspiracy, no?

[edit on 1/31/2010 by ANOK]


So why did your P4T pals bang on about them for so long and so embarrassingly?

This is a constant refrain here. Something is brought up, peddled as truth, then made to look foolish. At that point the ground is not conceded, but instead you jump back to some other trope of 9/11 lore.

I've lost count of the number of times someone has been made to look foolish about some facet of 9/11, only for them to splutter "What about Building 7 though????"

The fact is that most of you have a vague feeling that something isn't right, and you rely on an enormous supply of massed innuendo, most of which collapses when any proper scrutiny is placed on it. Only if you have a gigantic bias can much of this even be countenanced as evidence. Come at it with a vaguely open mind and it looks flimsy, pathetic even.

So if you want to stick to the core 9/11 issues, be my guest. But let's leave off all these tedious evidence-free sideshows.



reply posted on 31-1-2010 @ 07:13 PM by Sean48
Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
Originally posted by ANOK
reply to post by dereks



Locked cabin doors have NO relevance to the buildings collapses, which is the ultimate conspiracy, no?

[edit on 1/31/2010 by ANOK]


So why did your P4T pals bang on about them for so long and so embarrassingly?

This is a constant refrain here. Something is brought up, peddled as truth, then made to look foolish. At that point the ground is not conceded, but instead you jump back to some other trope of 9/11 lore.

I've lost count of the number of times someone has been made to look foolish about some facet of 9/11, only for them to splutter "What about Building 7 though????"

The fact is that most of you have a vague feeling that something isn't right, and you rely on an enormous supply of massed innuendo, most of which collapses when any proper scrutiny is placed on it. Only if you have a gigantic bias can much of this even be countenanced as evidence. Come at it with a vaguely open mind and it looks flimsy, pathetic even.

So if you want to stick to the core 9/11 issues, be my guest. But let's leave off all these tedious evidence-free sideshows.


I'll keep it simple for ya trick.....

What the planes were doin at the time of impact, if they were serving fish or chicken , doesn't relate to the collapse of the building.

A little thought before posting saves these little lesson's.


reply posted on 31-1-2010 @ 07:34 PM by TrickoftheShade
reply to post by Sean48


It is indeed relatively easy. ANOK wishes only to discuss the building collapses. That's entirely his prerogative. But that doesn't mean that others can't talk about the P4T closed cabin door nonsense, or indeed anything else the TM produces that is complete nonsense. There is no privilege given to particular areas of the TM narrative just because you happen to feel that they're more important.


reply posted on 31-1-2010 @ 07:40 PM by Sean48
Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
reply to post by Sean48


It is indeed relatively easy. ANOK wishes only to discuss the building collapses. That's entirely his prerogative. But that doesn't mean that others can't talk about the P4T closed cabin door nonsense, or indeed anything else the TM produces that is complete nonsense. There is no privilege given to particular areas of the TM narrative just because you happen to feel that they're more important.


I agree 100% .

Those are all important aspects to be discussed, They should be talked about.

I can only say for myself, I wont talk airplanes ,flight . Why would I , I have very limited knowledge of those things.

If its cabin doors on planes you want to talk about , start a thread , or check out the P4T site
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>    ^^TOP^^



9-11 lecture at Basel University, Switzerland.
  Posted 16 days ago with 14 member flags
Newest 9/11 Documentary - Proof 9/11 was an inside Job
  Posted 0 days ago with 14 member flags
9/11 Actors re-visited
  Posted 9 days ago with 13 member flags
Building Collapses in Rio
  Posted 16 days ago with 6 member flags
new film "Human the film (2012)" covers all the bases and more!
  Posted 10 days ago with 6 member flags
Remains of 9/11 victim identified
  Posted 2 days ago with 5 member flags