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.

 

It is scientifically impossible that a plane hit the Pentagon on 9/11

page: 5
15
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 05:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by kaya82
 


?????


we dont need to be a pilot air crash investigater or any other professional body ....


Well....I am NOT an "air crash investigator"...but AM a professional body. BTW, next time you need some medical procedure.....keep in mind the comment: "...we dont need.....any professional body...."

GOOD LUCK with your appendectomy or heart transplant, there!!



the no evidence of a boeing crashing there .....


??Indeed?? Guess you haven't watched the videos.....


....and the us gov refusing to release the footage of that supposed plane is a major smoking gun.


??? ALL video HAS BEEN RELEASED!!! Sheesh.....it's on YouTube, for gosh sakes! (Search "DoubleTree" and "Sheraton" videos....besides the one from the Pentagon Guard Gate security camera).........


...alot of witmesses reported seeing the plane on a northern approach ....


Oh, THAT old chestnut??? (Define "alot"...).

Here, THIS will explain how those FEW "witnesses" testimonies were intentionally MISREPRESENTED by....yes, by that "crack" team known as the "C.I.T."....because, THAT is likely the source of your misinformation, per your post....HERE is a video to explain a LOT of what was misrepresented by the "Citizen's Investigation Team"... (derp!! Fools, [both] of them)...:




A THREAD you should read: www.abovetopsecret.com...



another of the many things of 9/11 i find strange is when the plane hit the wtc it didnt create a perfectly round exit whole on the other side yet the pentagon that was recently renovated did


HUH?????

Might want to think that one through, again......

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

ADDING....."TTWT" (The Trouble WIth Turcios) link:

www.veoh.com...
edit on 15 January 2011 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)
dont need no heart transplant mate plus i have 4 years experiance as a cardiac nurse but thanks for your advice

i have watched the videos luv and sorry ur not convinving me

i have seen the videos the gov has released pease dont make me laugh were the hell is the boeing please??????and what about the reported 80 + video footage that still hasnt been relased by the fbi who confascated them minutes after the crash (very strange) oh yeah u'll probly give me that oud chestnut NATIONAL SECURITY REASONS

nah i dont need to think nothing threw you tell me to and i wont

what happened the the 2 engines of th plane? where the danage from the lawn from those massive engines????




posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 05:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by kaya82
 


No, but if you had any experience in the subject you might realize that its not the OS that stinks so bad, but that its the stuff being shoveled out by the so-called "truth" movement. Take the OP, it is claimed that it is scientifically impossible for a plane to have hit the Pentagon (his definition of "science" seems to be different from Webster's). One of the reasons is that the tail of Flight 77 did not slice into the building like the nose/fuselage did. Of course, he also admits he has no idea of how its constructed, so he's basing his whole argument on what he thinks....rather than on facts.

Whereas, quite a few posters DO know how aircraft are built and how they react on impact....but we are dismissed out of hand because pointing out reality just screws with what he thinks.


how about the architecs and engineers and pilots for truth who dont believe the os?? oh yeah coz they dont fit in with ur fairy tale of the os they are also a bunch of nutters?



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 06:14 PM
link   
reply to post by kaya82
 


Your question on the videos has been asked countless times on ATS. The list has been published numerous times on ATS.

See following.

web.archive.org...

TJ



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 06:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by tommyjo
reply to post by kaya82
 


Your question on the videos has been asked countless times on ATS. The list has been published numerous times on ATS.

See following.

web.archive.org...

TJ

oh right so what your saying is non of those videos shows a boeing?

dont believe that for a second i dont believe anything ur corupt lot say

the pentagon has hundreds of camaras and not 1 of them captures it?

thats becayse a boeing DIDNT hit it!!



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 06:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by wasco2
There is ample, indeed irrefutable, evidence a Boeing 757 crashed into the Pentagon which should completely shut you down:

www.rense.com...
thats your opinion and u aint shuting no one down



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 06:35 PM
link   
reply to post by tommyjo
 


I don't think you guys are grasping how massive a tail section is & how ridiculous it is to think that it (Or any of the other huge parts of an airplane like the engines,for that matter) disintigrated into nothing.So here are some pictures.





This is my favorite.The whole plane has apparently exploded and/or burned to nothing (As is the proposed case with Flight 77),yet the tail section has survived fully in tact.


Look.This thing makes firetrucks look little.



















edit on 15-


You tellin me this plowed through the Pentagon without totally demolishing it OR shattered into pieces so small that we can't see them?Not even leaving just one big,recognizable piece? Then it did it again in Shanksville?
C'MON PEOPLE.This is an AIRPLANE we're talkin about here.Ya know that GIGANTIC,metal thing we've all gotten in that comfortably fits 2-300 people & their luggage.
edit on 15-1-2011 by youngdrodeau because: Needed to add a few things
extra DIV



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 07:05 PM
link   
reply to post by wasco2
 


The link you provided is just a buncha documentation.I don't wanna see paperwork,I wanna see plane wreckage.Anyone can write anything.



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 07:06 PM
link   
reply to post by youngdrodeau
 


So you use pics of two tailfins that departed their respective aircraft in flight and didnt hang around for the crash. Then you post pics of other crashes, mostly those on landing......Tell me, which of those pics is from a crash in which the jet struck a concrete building at high speed? Apples and oranges again.



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 07:07 PM
link   
reply to post by kaya82
 


Nutters? Nope. Misinformed, lied to, tricked..but nutters nope. Well not most of them anyway.....



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 07:08 PM
link   
reply to post by kaya82
 





the pentagon has hundreds of camaras and not 1 of them captures it?


Hundreds of cameras? Show me the proof.



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 07:08 PM
link   
reply to post by vipertech0596
 

Even if the tail section of a plane went "poof" after striking a hard enough surface at a fast enough speed, there'd be some evidence where they hit, if not also little pieces of tail droppings with their logo colors all over the place.



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 07:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by kaya82
 



the pentagon has hundreds of camaras and not 1 of them captures it?

Hundreds of cameras? Show me the proof.

So the they just had one?



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 07:14 PM
link   
reply to post by vipertech0596
 


How do you know the circumstances of these plane crashes?Oh yeah..YOU DON'T.So stop just saying stuff.

Anyway,the purpose of these pictures isn't to compare crashes,it's to show how MASSIVE these things are.
edit on 15-1-2011 by youngdrodeau because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 07:21 PM
link   
I absolutely believe in a conspiracy.
I absolutely think it was an inside job.
I think the "No plane at the Pentagon" is a bunch of stupidity meant to make those who dont believe the OS look like crackpots, much like "holograms hit the WTC".



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 07:22 PM
link   
reply to post by ATH911
 


And in the pre-collapse photos of the Pentagon, you can see where the limestone facade was shattered by the impact of the tail. Also, there were plenty of little pieces of what was left of the tail....you know, those little pieces of wreckage that the OP believes the Plane Fairy dropped all over the place after the explosion.



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 07:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by ATH911
 


And in the pre-collapse photos of the Pentagon, you can see where the limestone facade was shattered by the impact of the tail. Also, there were plenty of little pieces of what was left of the tail....you know, those little pieces of wreckage that the OP believes the Plane Fairy dropped all over the place after the explosion.

Where and where?



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 07:25 PM
link   
reply to post by youngdrodeau
 


The circumstances of the crashes that you used the picture from, can be found in any number of places online. Not to mention....you used the pic of AA flight 587 that crashed in Queens in November 2001 and then the Air France flight that disappeared over the Atlantic on its way to South America. Even an internet savvy fellow such as yourself should be able to find the details on those two.



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 07:38 PM
link   
9/11 MADNESS
post removed because of personal attacks

Click here to learn more about this warning.



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 07:43 PM
link   
reply to post by youngdrodeau
 


Your are choosing images to suit your theory of how a tail should survive a crash. This has been covered countless times on ATS. Go back and see my previous post with links to others who witnessed the tail wreckage. Just because images of it haven't been released does not mean that it wasn't present.

See account relayed from T. Carter who visited the Pentagon. See also the Stonemasons account of the melted aluminium in the blocks they took down.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

TJ



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 07:51 PM
link   
reply to post by tommyjo
 


All I am doing is showing that tail sections are huge.That is all.I am not picking pictures that suit my needs.I picked ANY picture of a tail section I could find.Notice,the one of the Virgin plane isn't even a plane crash.Please stop making this argument & stick to the topic discussed in the thread.Thank you.




top topics



 
15
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join