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.

 

Is it truly plausible that the OS happened this way?

page: 2
5
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 11:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by v1rtu0s0
Good questions, but I think the "no-planers =disinfo" people will be arriving shortly.

I think everyone agree's something strange is happening with the pentagon. The WTC, on the other hand... I think the truthers believe planes hit, and the trusters do as well. The truther's believe that the no-plane is a disinfo ploy, designed to discredit truthers...


I had this same discussion in another thread. This whole "no plane hit the Pentagon" bit was invented by French author Thierry Meyssan to sell a bunch of books, and all the trusters who explicitly trust everything these damned fool conspiracy web sites are shoveling out are mindlessly swallowing the no plane at the Pentagon claim like gospel. Accusing Meyssan of really being some secret gov't disinformation agent is taking abject paranoia to a whole other level, seeing all the other shenanigans the guy has been up to.

Personally, the only thing I find strange is why the conspiracy people need to continue to take their conspiracy claims to even more convoluted levels than they already are. The claim that the towers were destroyed by secret controlled demolitions and/or lasers from outer space and covered up by fake hijacked aircraft and/or holograms is a pretty humungous horse pill to swallow as it is, without having to introduce more crackpot claims about what happened at the Pentagon.




posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 11:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack

Originally posted by ayoss
I think the planes could probably cut through the steel beams due to the enormous amounts of energy involved in the collision, but I find it odd that 2 buildings can take asymmetrical damage and fall symmetrically. I would think that if the supports are weakened on one side, if it collapses, wouldn't it fall towards the path of least resistance?


Regardless of speed, it's hard to believe the flimsy aluminium wings still cut through steel...


Why is that? During WWII Japanese kamikaze airplanes made out of aluminum penetrated the steel decks of ships and sank a number of them. This is becuase it was simply going fast enough to punch through.

Did it ever occur to you that it's the misunderstanding on how things happened exactly like this that's fueling all these conspiracy stories, rather than any actual evidence of impropriety? How much experience with visiting crash sites does anyone on these boards have, anyway?



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 03:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by samkent
Your lack of physics knowledge is why you cannot believe planes did the damage.

Here is a simple science experiment that has been done for decades that might help you to understand. Pushing a straw through a potato. I even remember it from science class in the late sixties. Back then we used paper straws.




Straw through potato

Note the reason it works.




The straw penetrates the potato easily because it is a strong cylinder made from thin plastic which also


I dare say the straw is moving far slower than the planes.


Nice try, but FAIL.

I see you omitted:



The straw penetrates the potato easily because it is a strong cylinder made from thin plastic which also makes it sharp . Cylinders are strong if compressed from end to end, but not from the sides. Raw potatoes are hard, but easy to cut with a sharp knife (or straw!).


1. The wing did not hit the steel from 'end to end'. It hit it from its side. Therefore the compression point is invalid.
2. Raw potatoes are hard, but easy to guy with a knife. You can not cut steel with a knife. Not is one straight swoop anyway.

I believe planes hit the towers. I just want to know how it happened. Or a rational and logical theory of how the plane fully embedded itself in the tower before a big explosion happened.
I don't believe that plane carcass from the crash was found on the Builders Trust building, however. '



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 03:15 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


Thanks Dave, for once again, inputting absolutely NOTHING relevant to do with this thread or the questions being raised throughout it.
I see you found a way to implement 'damned fool conspiracy web sites' into your redundant ramblings again, though.



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 04:41 PM
link   
reply to post by samkent
 


LOL you really think a straw through a potato is a good comparison for a plane through steel?

You didn't even read your own link mate...


The straw penetrates the potato easily because it is a strong cylinder made from thin plastic which also
makes it sharp.
Cylinders are strong if compressed from end to end, but not from the sides. Raw potatoes
are hard, but easy to cut with a sharp knife (or straw!).

www.abc.net.au...

How does that even compare?

Edit; DIDtm beat me too it...
edit on 12/27/2010 by ANOK because: typo



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 04:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Why is that? During WWII Japanese kamikaze airplanes made out of aluminum penetrated the steel decks of ships and sank a number of them. This is becuase it was simply going fast enough to punch through.


Those planes were loaded with bombs torpedoes etc.

That is why they penetrated steel hulls Dave.

See there is always a logical explanation Dave.


The pilots deliberately crashed aircraft loaded with explosives and fuel into Allied ships, acting as manned missiles – more accurate and destructive than normal bombs.

www.environmentalgraffiti.com...

Were the 9-11 planes loaded with bombs Dave?

How many more times are you debunkers gonna pull out this crap about straw into trees and kamikaze pilots?
How many times do we have to debunk you before you stop trying to spread lies?
edit on 12/27/2010 by ANOK because: typo



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 08:55 PM
link   
I think this is an example of the lack of science in US schools.



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 09:15 PM
link   
reply to post by DIDtm
 


Look at your picture - notice the exterior wall is not solid, but made of lattice of steel beams welded and bolted
together in sections.


Plane did not penetrate - it snapped the welds and bolts off and pushed the broken sections out of the way

Here is a picture of wall section laying on street - also notice aircraft wheel embedded in it






posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 09:16 PM
link   
reply to post by DIDtm
 


Look at your picture - notice the exterior wall is not solid, but made of lattice of steel beams welded and bolted
together in sections.


Plane did not penetrate - it snapped the welds and bolts off and pushed the broken sections out of the way

Here is a picture of wall section laying on street - also notice aircraft wheel embedded in it






posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 09:16 PM
link   
reply to post by DIDtm
 


Look at your picture - notice the exterior wall is not solid, but made of lattice of steel beams welded and bolted
together in sections.


Plane did not penetrate - it snapped the welds and bolts off and pushed the broken sections out of the way

Here is a picture of wall section laying on street - also notice aircraft wheel embedded in it






posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 07:03 PM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 


That would make sense if the plane wings hit the tower horizontally.



But on an angle?
Again..I think planes struck the towers...just trying to rationalize it.



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 10:25 PM
link   
see that pic up there....it's cgi....the original pic lacked the right wingtip cut.....4 feet was added
the original pic is easily discerned to be different



posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 12:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by GBP/JPY
see that pic up there....it's cgi....the original pic lacked the right wingtip cut.....4 feet was added
the original pic is easily discerned to be different


Are these CGI as well?





If so, please provide a pic to show how it 'should' have looked.



posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 02:33 AM
link   
reply to post by GBP/JPY
 







new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1   >>

log in

join