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.

 

NASA Flight Director Confirms 9/11 Aircraft Speed As The "Elephant In The Room"

page: 29
127
<< 26  27  28    30  31  32 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 07:48 PM
link   
reply to post by TiffanyInLA
 

After reading your private message, I came back to see what you had to present.


"You can see all their pretty smiles, many in uniform, along with summaries of how they got started researching 9/11..." ~ TiffanyInLA


Everyone on that list is giving 'their opinions', so absolutely nothing they have to say can be considered as fact. I read through everything that was on that list, and I even clicked on the links they provided. All that information is based upon one person's paranoia, and a whole mess of people who bought into his delusions.


patriotsquestion911.com...
"So I started poking around on the Internet trying to find anything I can to back up the government’s story because I didn't want to believe our government might have had something to do with 9/11. Early on, I came across Operation Northwoods. It blew me away that elements of our government had seriously planned acts of terrorism inside the United States to justify invading Cuba. Consider that 9/11 Commission Chairman Thomas Kean had said, "The greatest failure of 9/11 was lack of imagination", yet just under 40 years prior, elements of our own government imagined perpetrating such an event!" ~ Rob Balsamo


How was this whole 9/11 conspiracy theory started?
Mr. Balsamo bumped into a 'Wikipedia' article, which matched a theory he personally created. After seeing an old 1962 CIA document online, he created this illusion that it was connected to the events of 9/11.

It is all hypothetical from his perspective. None of this is factual. Events that were outlined in Operation Northwoods do not reflect the events that occurred on 9/1/01.


Now certainly the FAA and NTSB can fabricate information. But they need to be held responsible for the information they provide. Don't you think? ~ TiffanyInLA

...and a regular Joe online can't fabricate information? Maybe Mr. Balsamo needs to be held accountable.

[edit on 13-7-2010 by Section31]




posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 07:51 PM
link   
reply to post by ipsedixit
 


I was on 95/395 North .ing to work at 19th and L st NW.. In traffic.. basicly right between the Pentagon and the crystal city tower.



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 07:51 PM
link   
I am a truther myself, and believe that the Government is hiding much about what actually happened on 9/11.

However, while I believe that the plane hitting the Pentagon might be questionable (due to the complete lack of wreckage from the plane and the resistance from TPTB to release video camera footage of the plane's approach to the Pentagon) the sheer volume of witnesses (and I mean live ones, not just the ones who saw it on tv, as I did) that say there WERE planes that crashed into tower 1 and 2 seem to eliminate the possibility that the planes didn't actually crash into the tower.

What I question, is the official story of events leading to the towers' collapse (especially tower 7), not the fact that the planes flew into them (except tower7).



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 07:59 PM
link   
9/11 MADNESS
post removed because of personal attacks

Click here to learn more about this warning.



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 08:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
reply to post by ipsedixit
 


It took a lot longer to happen to EA990 than "Tiffany" would have you believe though. Have a look at the wikipedia page - particularly the graph showing the descent - and ask yourself if, using the OP's criteria, it shouldn't have failed earlier.


With all due respect, the period you are talking about is one of 40 seconds which comes to an end at around 16,000 ft. of altitude. The plane did come apart in the air on the second dive, when it was under less stress. I can't help but think that if the stress in the first dive had been prolonged for a few seconds more and another thousand feet or more of descent, the plane may very well have come apart much sooner than it did.

Do we know at what precise moment it reached .99 Mach? Did it lose airspeed during that first dive and thus lessen stress on itself?

I haven't really looked at the NTSB account of the dives in great detail. I believe that odd deployments of elevators are noted by NTSB, indicating erratic flight characteristics in the dives.

Bottom line, I'm really not competent to make a judgement impeaching the OP's conclusions. They seem generally sound to me.

[edit on 13-7-2010 by ipsedixit]



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 08:13 PM
link   
This is why the general public thinks truthers are lunatics.. You can be provided facts and you still can not admit that you are wrong... I believe that the govt. had allot to do with 911... BUT.. I swear on all 3 of my kids eye sight .. I SAW THE PLANE hit the pentagon... now I am afraid to say this.. This will give the dreamers something to dream about! The angle we were at .. we lost sight of it roughly 300 yards before impact..(the pentagon is below the off ramp to the parkway there).. But saw the fire ball from the impact..

Now the wack jobs will say.. The plane flew over the pentagon and a rocket hit it.. .. 300 yards at a few hundred miles an hour....ing down..way to fast to pull out..This plane was maybe 100 feet off the ground, and .ing down.. It did a screaming turn over Crystal city...Behind us clockwise and then flew a line straight into the side. I know what I saw.. Did I see impact?? nope... But the only way that plane didnt hit at the speed and angle... if it pulled a Delorian in back to the future and disapeared.. Thats all... Now my Ex's mom saw the actual plane go into the building.. She said it looked like the building ate the plane.. like something in a movie..


You may think the plane overshot the building..... if it did that.. it would have hit one of the museums or the first row of buildings .ing north into DC...

It was a very fast large plane.. PERIOD!!!..



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 08:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine
If these vauable opinions are based on experience, who has the experience of flying one of these aircraft at 500+ kts at under 1000' so they could make an informed judgement on the difficulty these pilots might have had striking the buildings?

Yep, Dwain is guessing, PFT is guessing, and you are guessing.


So I gather you would take a turn in a Ford Truck at the same speed you would a Corvette? Because clearly you don't know when your car would be out of control unless you done it before.

Give it a rest. You're reaching.


No one is "guessing", it is based on experience, precedent and data. AS you can see, other pilots here on ATS get it. You never will.



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 08:18 PM
link   
Let me clarify something ... The WTC story and building 7 is bullcrap.. I dont buy most of that story.. I think the Govt. knew all of this was going to happen.. The pentagon having that area closed.. The plane flying south past and then turning to hit the south side.That plane had a clear shot at it flying south east... Why did it turn 180 and hit the south side??? Doesn't make sense... .. BUT I saw that damn plane.. so to tell me otherwise makes you look crazy, in my eyes!

I also have a cousin that was on the Rosevelt.. He says they scrambled jets 20 to 30 minutes before the official report says they did.. I think 93 was blown out of the sky! "lets roll" the biggest bunch of "feel good" rally the country crap I have ever heard..

Also phone calls from the plane , when that tech. didn't exist until after sept. 11 2001.. crap also..

I am not anti truther.. I know what I saw!!!!

[edit on 13-7-2010 by Mobius1974]



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 08:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Section31
reply to post by TiffanyInLA
 

After reading your private message, I came back to see what you had to present.


"You can see all their pretty smiles, many in uniform, along with summaries of how they got started researching 9/11..." ~ TiffanyInLA


Everyone on that list is giving 'their opinions', so absolutely nothing they have to say can be considered as fact. I read through everything that was on that list, and I even clicked on the links they provided. All that information is based upon one person's paranoia, and a whole mess of people who bought into his delusions.


patriotsquestion911.com...
"So I started poking around on the Internet trying to find anything I can to back up the government’s story because I didn't want to believe our government might have had something to do with 9/11. Early on, I came across Operation Northwoods. It blew me away that elements of our government had seriously planned acts of terrorism inside the United States to justify invading Cuba. Consider that 9/11 Commission Chairman Thomas Kean had said, "The greatest failure of 9/11 was lack of imagination", yet just under 40 years prior, elements of our own government imagined perpetrating such an event!" ~ Rob Balsamo


How was this whole 9/11 conspiracy theory started?
Mr. Balsamo bumped into a 'Wikipedia' article, which matched a theory he personally created. After seeing an old 1962 CIA document online, he created this illusion that it was connected to the events of 9/11.

It is all hypothetical from his perspective. None of this is factual. Events that were outlined in Operation Northwoods do not reflect the events that occurred on 9/1/01.


Now certainly the FAA and NTSB can fabricate information. But they need to be held responsible for the information they provide. Don't you think? ~ TiffanyInLA

...and a regular Joe online can't fabricate information? Maybe Mr. Balsamo needs to be held accountable.

[edit on 13-7-2010 by Section31]


Clearly you didn't click on any links as the information is based on data provided by government agencies. It doesn't support their story.

Feel free to get your own at ntsb.gov. Many others have, even those who blindly support the government story.



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 08:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mobius1974
reply to post by TiffanyInLA
 


Why in the world would someone of sound mind... google to see what other people said about what I SAW WITH MY OWN EYES?


Because they saw it too. Including Pentagon Police Officers interviewed on location.

You don't have to google it, but many others are viewing it.

Citizen Investigation Team - National Security Alert

Try it, you may be surprised what your fellow residents of Arlington say, there are many of them filmed on location in the best possible vantage points. Let us know if you agree or disagree.



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 08:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mobius1974
reply to post by TiffanyInLA
 

Why in the world would someone of sound mind... google to see what other people said about what I SAW WITH MY OWN EYES?


Due to widespread dishonesty in the world, people don't trust one another. Most people have figured that out. In important matters involving crimes people want to see substantial amounts of evidence.

Why do you suppose the government hasn't released all the confiscated videotape of the Pentagon strike? They could do away with all the questions about the Pentagon incident in one stroke. If it were up to you would you release them? You seem like an honest fellow. Why won't the government release the tapes?


See this is the problem with folks like yourself.. Just because there are conspiracies.. you think everything in life has to be a conspiracy...


You know nothing about the OP and consequently nothing about people like her.


We were close enough we felt the concussion and felt the pressure change in the car..


That in itself is counter indicative of an airplane crash. That would indicate an explosion of some sort.


I had 2 other people riding with me, 3 of us saw the same thing.. I do not care what someone says they think they saw.. I know what I saw..


Your personal word is noted but not decisive to anyone but yourself.


My ex's mom with the DOA in DC saw the plane enter the building ... she said it looked like the building ate the plane..


That is a completely absurd statement. Some people spend too much time eating. Is she overweight?


You should get a medical examination.. tell them everything!! Ill bet your on meds or on a couch by recomendation!


You're not qualified to judge anyone's mentality. If you were you wouldn't be so cavalier about it.

[edit on 13-7-2010 by ipsedixit]



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 08:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mobius1974
reply to post by ipsedixit
 


I was on 95/395 North .ing to work at 19th and L st NW.. In traffic.. basicly right between the Pentagon and the crystal city tower.


You claim you first saw the aircraft at 2 oclock and it circled around you behind, then you saw it hit.


Originally posted by Mobius1974
we watched it circle from our 2 oclock ... clock wise behind us all the way to the pentagon..


You describe the early flight path released.

media.photobucket.com...

The above flight path is wrong according to the NTSB and everyone else who blindly supports the government story.

This is the flight path according to the NTSB.

upload.wikimedia.org...

There is no possible way you could have seen the aircraft at your 2 oclock position if you were north on 395 between the Pentagon and Crystal city.

You may be yet another witness to the deception being created by the US Government. Care to go on record? Or do you wish to change your story.





[edit on 13-7-2010 by TiffanyInLA]



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 08:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by ipsedixit

Originally posted by Mobius1974
reply to post by TiffanyInLA
 

Why in the world would someone of sound mind... google to see what other people said about what I SAW WITH MY OWN EYES?


Due to widespread dishonesty in the world, people don't trust one another. Most people have figure that out. In important matters involving crimes people want to see substantial amounts of evidence.


I only know what I saw..


Why do you suppose the government hasn't released all the confiscated videotape of the Pentagon strike? They could do away with all the questions about nthe Pentagon incident in one stroke. If it were up to you would you release it? You seem like an honest fellow. Why won't the government release the tapes?


It is like everything.. I would release them.. I beg of them to release them..It would solve everything... Again.. I know exactly what I saw.


See this is the problem with folks like yourself.. Just because there are conspiracies.. you think everything in life has to be a conspiracy.

You know nothing about the OP and consequently nothing about people like her....


I know that she believes everything that is laid in front of her that goes against the govt. story.


We were close enough we felt the concussion and felt the pressure change in the car..




That in itself is counter indicative of an airplane crash. That would indicate an explosion of some sort.


Planes full of fuel hits building= explosion


I had 2 other people riding with me, 3 of us saw the same thing.. I do not care what someone says they think they saw.. I know what I saw

Your personal word is noted but not decisive to anyone but yourself.

My ex's mom with the DOA in DC saw the plane enter the building ... she said it looked like the building ate the plane..
That is a completely absurd statement. Some people spend too much time eating. Is she overweight?..


She is enormous!!!


You should get a medical examination.. tell them everything!! Ill bet your on meds or on a couch by recomendation!

You're not qualified to judge anyone's mentality. If you were you wouldn't be so cavalier about it.


Now isn't that special.. You do not know me, or my back ground, or my moral compass. I feel that anyone that sets their mind to an idea and then disreguards any oposing views, is either a Narsasist or has mental health issues.



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 08:43 PM
link   
reply to post by TiffanyInLA
 

I posted to Craig Ranke one time that if he really wanted to bury the Bush administration under an avalanche of witnesses that counter the official flight path at the Pentagon, all he had to do was to advertise for "right thinking" Americans to come forward with their stories of what they saw on 9/11, to "help the government" put an end once and for all to the conspiracy theory of what happened there.



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 08:46 PM
link   
reply to post by TiffanyInLA
 


Nope not one bit.. Look.. I know what I saw and how it happened.. It was basicly on our right side..(we were facing slighly north east.. but closer to dead north on the part of the expressway we were on.) it came around behind us (right side) and then straightened out for a brief period before we lost view.

This is exactly why I think you have a screw loose.. You have to or choose to assume that everyone with a contradictory version of events is a govt. agent.

Just because many before you have exhausted themselves trying to find dirt.. and your good at copying and pasting.. does not make you any more than a stars and flags chasing parrot IMO. Govt agent... muhahaha.. Ignore me.. Its obvious that you are not open minded... but on a mission to make others believe what you believe!..



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 08:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by ipsedixit
reply to post by TiffanyInLA
 

I posted to Craig Ranke one time that if he really wanted to bury the Bush administration under an avalanche of witnesses that counter the official flight path at the Pentagon, all he had to do was to advertise for "right thinking" Americans to come forward with their stories of what they saw on 9/11, to "help the government" put an end once and for all to the conspiracy theory of what happened there.



Well, the thing is, Mobius describes the "Down The River Approach".

Many witnesses describe this, and it is fatal to the government story.

Mobius, you should REALLY watch National Security Alert by Citizen Investigation Team. Many witnesses describe your flight path, unfortunately, debunkers don't like that as the flight path you describe really puts a wrench in the government story.

You should really go on record.

[edit on 13-7-2010 by TiffanyInLA]



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 08:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mobius1974
Planes full of fuel hits building= explosion


No. Not unless the plane was carrying explosives.

Planes burst into flames when their fuel tanks break and the fuel ignites but explosions are the product of special circumstances and don't happen during the usual plane crash.

People on the other side of the Pentagon, opposite the explosion also felt the concussion.

There are numerous videos of crashing planes bursting into flames. Those are not explosions with concussion waves. The creation of those waves requires special conditions, usually the presence of explosives.

[edit on 13-7-2010 by ipsedixit]



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 08:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by TiffanyInLA
Clearly you didn't click on any links as the information is based on data provided by government agencies. It doesn't support their story.

Feel free to get your own at ntsb.gov. Many others have, even those who blindly support the government story.

I don't need to look any further. Since nothing on that page convinces me that his speculations are based on any facts, there is really no reason to dig into this story any further.

Lets pretend that this thread is a court of law. You the prosecutor walk into my court room with a document from 1962, which was based upon an entirely different scenario altogether. Upon reading that one piece of evidence, I then turn to you and ask, "Is this all you have?". You then proceed to show me these videos and images, which were taken during the events of 9/11. My next question would be, "So, you have an old document from 1962, photos and video that clearly show planes going into three buildings, and you want me to do what with them?"

So, you proceed to bring in all these 'secondhand' witnesses, and each person tells their story respectfully. Everyone gives their 'theoretical' insights into what actually occurred on 9/11, but 'none of them' can provide 'actual' hard proof of specific names, places, and events that lead up to the 9/11 attacks. I look at you and say, "So, you have images and videos that show planes crashing into buildings. You brought me an old 1962 document, which talks about an entirely different set of events. All your witnesses are giving me 'their personal interpretation' of events, but there is nothing else you can tell me 'specifically' on how all this is connected?"

I slam the gavel down, and say, "I fall in favor of the United States government, for the entire case before me is based upon 'witness speculations'. None of the proof provided can connect anyone specific to a time, place, or series of events, which would get me to believe 9/11 is an inside job."

You say, "Let us check the U.S. government's archives, so we can gather enough evidence for a case."

I the judge will say, "Ma'am, this is a court of LAW. When you bring someone to court, you 'must' provide substantial evidence to support your claims."

"Case closed"

[edit on 13-7-2010 by Section31]



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 08:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mobius1974
reply to post by TiffanyInLA
 


Nope not one bit.. Look.. I know what I saw and how it happened.. It was basicly on our right side..(we were facing slighly north east.. but closer to dead north on the part of the expressway we were on.) it came around behind us (right side) and then straightened out for a brief period before we lost view.


You said you saw the impact, no? Why do you now claim you lost view?

There is no way you could have seen the aircraft at your 2 oclock position unless you were 7-10 miles away from the Pentagon, according to the NTSB Flight Path. You certainly wouldn't be able to see any impact.

You claim you were on 395 between the Pentagon and Crystal City.

You describe the Down The River Approach.

This is fatal to the government story.


This is exactly why I think you have a screw loose.. You have to or choose to assume that everyone with a contradictory version of events is a govt. agent.


I never claimed nor do I think you're a govt agent.



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 08:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Section31

I don't need to look any further. Since nothing on that page convinces me that his speculations are based on any facts, there is really no reason to dig into this story any further.


Ignorance is bliss I suppose. But the data is there and all analysis is based on data.

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink - comes to mind.

[edit on 13-7-2010 by TiffanyInLA]




top topics



 
127
<< 26  27  28    30  31  32 >>

log in

join