Overwhelming Evidence Pentagon Aircraft Data Is Not From An American Airlines 757

All I got to say about this thread is:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Anthrax attacks have nothing to do with large flying bodies blasting into large structural architecture causing damage and eventual collapse of some of the edifices. See that's where science fiction tries to fill in the parts of science that's misunderstood, and cannot be demonstrated in a laboratory to satisfy those with preconceived notions of conspiracies. Even if it could it would be deemed 'Photoshoped' like the moon landings 40 some years ago.

One will never change the mind made up already, the arguments are a waste of time and stupid. A stupid waste of time you have left of your precious life.

reply to post by dereks


"The door sensor was not connected so how could it show the door being opened"?-derek

People still selling that lie?doesn't feel too good does it?It can be proven that the door wasn't open for the entire flight,can it be proven the censor wasn't connected?

reply to post by TrueAmerican

The truly horrific and scary part of the scenario is what happened to the passengers and crew of the "hijacked" flight? So far, a lot of data and evidence points away from a 757 impacting the Pentagon. If we take it from there, WHERE ARE THE PEOPLE? Where is the original plane?

On Jesse Ventura's show "Conspiracy Theory," it is said that our government knew that hijackers had taken over the jetliner ON THE GROUND and were cleared for take-off. It should be noted that the term "hijackers" does not mean, necessarily, that they were the middle-eastern hijackers. Generic "hijackers" had taken over the cockpit prior to take-off, supposedly.

What does a clandestine group do with however-many passengers and crew were aboard? Were they killed elsewhere? Were they sequestered, forever, somewhere and given new lives in a location impossible to escape and out of public awareness?

Obvioulsy, sheer speculation on my part, but thought-provoking. If a 757 did not hit the Pentagon, then what happened to the passengers and crew...? Truly scary thoughts emerge when trying to answer that question.

reply to post by GhostLancer


I heard that all 4 planes had an unusually low amount of passengers on board.
Is that true? I know the count was low but not if that's unusual..

There are a number of facts that make the OS impossible. And you don't have to be a pilot to understand them.

1) The information provided from the FDR shows and airspeed and rate of descent inconsistent with the height of the light poles that this plane supposedly took down. When you take into consideration the airspeed and the rate of descent, you can triangulate the altitude that the plane would be at when crossing the highway. The numbers provided show that the aircraft would have to be between 300 and 400 ft. AGL.

2) The walls of the Pentagon are made of 18" of steel reinforced concrete. There was a nearly perfectly round hole at the inside of the 3rd ring. That's 9' of steel reinforced concrete that this aircraft penetrated. Really? An aluminum airplane pierced through 9 feet of steel reinforced concrete and was still intact and strong enough to leave a nice, neat hole on the inside wall of the 3rd ring?

3) When skilled, experienced pilots land these airliners, in the best of conditions they are lucky if they can make contact with the runway, consistently, within a couple hundred feet of a given touchdown point. The landings just aren't that precise, that's why they have a threshold that is a couple hundred feet long. Given that, in order for this terrorist "pilot" to pin point the side of the Pentagon and make contact without ever scraping the ground, he would have had be extremely lucky. The odds of that happening are extremely slim.

4) The turns and the descent this pilot took during his little flight exhibit extremely smooth and accurate flying. Based on the information provided, this guy couldn't even pilot a Cessna. Therefore, one of two things happened; he "hand flew" the aircraft from the point of the hijacking all the way to the ground or he was familiar enough with the auto-pilot that he plugged in the information as soon as he took over the plane. It is extremely unlikely that he was skilled enough to hand-fly that aircraft, with such precision, and then hit his target dead on. That only leave the "auto-pilot" option.

There are just too many inconsistencies in the OS for it to have happened the way they said it did. The only thing that could penetrate 9 feet of steel reinforced concrete would be a bunker buster or something along those lines.

Underwhelming evidence once again. If the data is not from an AA 757 what do they think it is from?

Are these clowns the old "north-of-citgo-flyover" team? Their coffers must be nearly empty and they need to generate income by finding some new suckers to sell CD's to.

blablablblabla....

wake up! 9/11 was not an inside job....get over it

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by civilchallenger

 

Thank you for summarizing....from your post, just the "Top Five":

To summarize the evidence you linked to:

1. The flight data recorder (FDR) is not in an American Airlines format.
2. The flight deck door was never reported as being open to FDR.
3. There was a severe mismatch in coordinates that should have grounded the flight.
4. The flight data recorder lists the GPS as operational when American Airlines did not have any GPS units at that time on any of their craft.
5. An "auto-alignment" was done on the aircraft according to the FDR. American Airlines airlines flights however did not have that capability at the time.

#1? Is THAT the claim made by PfffT?? Laughably, incontrovertibly wrong.

#2? I am aware that the clowns at PfffT are still clinging to that pathetic, and utterly debunked LIE. How sad.....

#3? Oh?? Well, again....the PfffT claims are, shall we say, in "error".

#4? Really?? Just like the Flight Deck Door parameter....how much you wanna bet??

#5? BS!! Utter, complete rubbish. The IRS units are aligned, AT THE GATE, with the engines off...about one half hour before departure. This, shortly after the crew arrives, and begins cockpit set-up. Whole process takes less than ten minutes. The SSFDR does NOT OPERATE until the engines are started, and the engine-driven generators ore supplying normal AC and DC power to the normal electrical buses.

Oh, as per the style of Balsamo and Friends ("friends" usually refers to his many sock-puppets, here on ATS), this latest screed is LOADED with falsehoods, almost on the money, but not quite references, and more of the same typical hogwash to over-complicate the "point" they are attempting to make....

....it is called, in some circles, "Smoke and Mirrors". "Razzmatazz".

And, "Baffle 'em with B----" also, in other less refined settings. Oh, there is a LOT to go over, and to dissect, lay open, and tear apart and repair, in order to find the truth, out of the normal MESS that spews from the creative little "Balsamo Brain" (Pat. Pending).....

Lol this is why i come to this useless site and post useless comments! Civil go ahead and add this clown to the list with the 2 others. Another post of blah blah blah, without anything concrete about points 1-5 did they even read your post? Can anyone properly debunk these five points with hard evidence? This isnt a forum, its a comment board!

reply to post by thedman

I want to see the pieces of the plane reconstructed like they do in forensic investigations.
I want o see the hamburger that was made of the passengers and to have DNA matching done as much as possible.

According to the officials the plane totally evaporated (A hole in Pennsylvania is strikingly similar). The fact that the plane would have to do about Mach 15 to totally disintegrate the plane and it's contents.

There can only be one conclusion about that crash. It wasn't an airplane flown by American Airlines which collided with the Pentagon. It would not have been such a sensational disappearing act if it was an airplane.

The damage is consistent with a smaller aircraft. It would not be inconsistent with a larger cruise missile with a dummy warhead. The few photos released show this same needed smaller configuration.
I think this is easy, really. It was allowed to strike the building, absolutely no defense was initiated. No warning that an unauthorized flight on THIS day was making its way to the HQs of that defensive grid.

C'mon. Don't get lost in technicalities. Basic facts as reported in the original findings, along with the evidence presented can only lead to a conclusion that the attack was planned long before there was Arab involvement.

Originally posted by pteridine
Underwhelming evidence once again. If the data is not from an AA 757 what do they think it is from?

Are these clowns the old "north-of-citgo-flyover" team? Their coffers must be nearly empty and they need to generate income by finding some new suckers to sell CD's to.

Can I get any FACTS with that crap..???

reply to post by largo


Odd isn't it.?

I reckon if they took the recovered wreckage from all 4 planes they still wouldn't put together 1 plane...

Originally posted by GhostLancer
If a 757 did not hit the Pentagon, then what happened to the passengers and crew...? Truly scary thoughts emerge when trying to answer that question.

Yeah, truly scary thoughts emerged for me too when I read the declassified Northwoods document, and the report on the Gulf of Tonkin from the Congressional Research Service. You sit through a part of the Iran contra hearings and watch as everyone's mouth drops when they are told "If we want it done, it gets done...The heck with Congress."

And then we find out that there were no WMD's in Iraq. And we watch the likes of Enron. And we witness the testimony of Clinton Curtis. We watch the EPA declare the air safe in NY after 9/11 only to further watch as the heroes die from lung diseases.

And someone has the nerve to come on a forum asking us why we don't believe the official story? We've got every damn reason on the planet to not believe it. It called historical precedence. American historical precedence. But we have more than that: Evidence. Something the debunkers seem to have a real hard time with.

Rob Balsamo is human. He makes mistakes. So the heck what. Every single one of us also does too. It does not change one iota the evidence which he has compiled over all these years, cross checked by other professional pilots. And the dude is saying it wasn't 77. Couldn't have been.

So where do we go from here... The heck if I know. Seeing as we can't get a debunker to technically refute what Rob is saying, cause he is over most of their heads, that really only leaves me with the option to believe Rob. I am not qualified technically to argue with him, so I can't really comment much beyond that.

Originally posted by largo
reply to post by thedman

 

I want to see the pieces of the plane reconstructed like they do in forensic investigations.

Which is only done when there is uncertainty to what caused the crash. It was quite obvious what happened to N644AA, it was hijacked by terrorists and crashed into a building.

I want o see the hamburger that was made of the passengers and to have DNA matching done as much as possible.

Images of the remnants of the passengers are available on the Moussaoui trial website.

For the DNA, you'd have to contact the Armed Forces Medical Examiner's office at Dover AFB.

If you want to physically get in touch with it, you're only 9½ years too late

According to the officials the plane totally evaporated (A hole in Pennsylvania is strikingly similar).

That is most certainly not the "official story". N644AA was more or less desintegrated during the impact, but there were still quite a large amount of debris, some of which could be positively matched to N644AA.

6 pages of FLUFF!! It's like a OSer picnic in this thread!

Let's take a look at some of the information provided by a legal FOIA request, and the resultant implications:

* Some of the data wouldn’t load properly into the standard American Airlines “Data Frame Layout” which reads flight data, some of the data wouldn’t even fit into Boeing’s generic flight data reader. This is the first step in showing the data was not from AA 77.

* The information, once decoded showed that the Pilots’ cabin door was never opened during flight, inconsistent with the alleged hijack situation.

* The initial GPS latitude/longitude data does not match gate D26 at Dulles from where the plane allegedly departed.

* The initial GPS type data showed the ground position as 3,000 feet off. It is American Airlines policy for every flight to manually enter the lat/long. If this reading showed during the pre-flight checks the plane would never have been allowed to take off.

* The flight data shows an in-flight GPS “auto-positioning” which was ONLY available on military aircraft at that time.

This is factual data from the United States Government, provided by law in a FOIA request, and stated by the 9/11 Commission to be accurate… and it shows a MILITARY PLANE flight data. There was no American Airlines flight 77 that day. Our government committed fraud by creating a scenario that an airplane hit the Pentagon. Why? For defense money? For fear? For war? To create the Department of Homeland Security?

CAN SOME OF YOU PLEASE TALK ABOUT THE POINT OF THIS THREAD - YOU'RE LIKE A BUNCH OF 3RD GRADERS IN HERE!!

by the way, which of you OSers is the one who was a 767 pilot? and where is he on this!

Originally posted by civilchallenger
reply to post by TrueAmerican

 

To summarize the evidence you linked to:

1. The flight data recorder (FDR) is not in an American Airlines format.
2. The flight deck door was never reported as being open to FDR.
3. There was a severe mismatch in coordinates that should have grounded the flight.
4. The flight data recorder lists the GPS as operational when American Airlines did not have any GPS units at that time on any of their craft.
5. An "auto-alignment" was done on the aircraft according to the FDR. American Airlines airlines flights however did not have that capability at the time.

All five points are strong evidence that the flight that hit the Pentagon (assuming it actually did hit) was a military plane or another type of plane... pretty much anything other than an American Airlines flight.

The resident "debunkers" (Hooper, Dereks, etc) totally ignored every single one of these points, except for Dereks who essentially said "nuh-uh" without any explanation whatsoever regarding the flight deck door on page one. I can't imagine how Dereks could expect people to believe his idea without a shred of evidence. The way the way virtually every single point made is entirely ignored makes "debunkers" a total embarrassment on these forums... they really come off as totally ignorant and also total space-cases the way one thing is said and they go immediately off on their own tangent. Every now and then when Hooper, Dereks, etc do such an awful job of "debunking" I actually try to help them out a little... but how could I in this case.

AA planes DID NOT HAVE GPS, DID NOT HAVE AUTO-ALIGN, AND DO CANCEL MISALIGNED FLIGHTS. Dereks, how can I help you out here? Ever change your mind when you're obviously wrong to a downright embarrassing degree?

Derek says: "So you find the truth boring, prefering the silly truther conspiracy theories - it appears that the truther story of the week is back to mini nukes, beam weapons and holographic planes!"
Does this sentence address point #1 Derek? No.
Does this sentence address point #2 Derek? No.
Does this sentence address point #3 Derek? No.
Does this sentence address point #4 Derek? No.
Does this sentence address point #5 Derek? No.

Hooper Says: "Oh well, what are you gonna do, huh? I guess we'll just never be allowed to be a part of Europe. I'll just have to cry myself to sleep again tonight."
Does this sentence address point #1 Hooper? No.
Does this sentence address point #2 Hooper? No.
Does this sentence address point #3 Hooper? No.
Does this sentence address point #4 Hooper? No.
Does this sentence address point #5 Hooper? No.

My message to Hooper, Dereks, and anybody else who does not accept these five findings by P4T is to put up or shut up. Is standard practice for a skeptic to totally ignore all the evidence when it doesn't fit your side of the story? Well its not supposed to be that way... you're supposed to look at each claim and evaluate it. This is an amazing bunch of claims by P4T... a collective of professionals that carries a lot of weight. If you choose to ignore it, you make an embarrassment of your selves and even ATS which is supposed to consist in big part of intelligent debate about complex conspiracy... not random jabs back and forth that are completely unrelated to the OP.

edit on 4-3-2011 by civilchallenger because: (no reason given)

I find your post very interesting. I cannot pretend to know all the details you refer to though I smell a rat--ie., I do NOT trust the official explanation of things. But I am very interested in your also pointing out the 'debnkers' tactics here, and I thought I would link this post/thread to a good video I saw yesterday which shows how disinformation works. And if we could apply it to this question we may not get manipulated away from the essentials. I recommend the watching of this video anyway:

THE TOP FOUR TACTICS OF DISINFORMATION

"Type 1: Provoke people with emotional and personal attacks

Disinformants seek to hijack the main topic and get people to divert their energies in to defending themselves or countering threats to their egoic identity.

Type 2: Introduce irrelevant & dead-end confusion

Whenever possible, the disinformant will introduce new facts or clues designed to conflict with opponent presentations — as useful tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution to establishing the whole truth.

Type 3: Character assassination by association

Disinformation tactic number three associates opponents with unpopular titles such as “kooks”, “radical right-wing”, “loony left-wing”, “terrorists”, “conspiracy buffs”, “radicals”, “militia”, “racists”, “religious fanatics”, “tin-hat wearers”, “sexual deviants”, “crazed lone wolf” and so forth.

Type 4: Argue the details of a different or less important subject.

The fourth and final tactic of disinformation in this article facilitates perpetual application of disinformation even when major truths fail to be suppressed and become well known (such as Iraq WMD’s, The USS Liberty false flag attack, The Lavon affair, etc). Disinformants simply ignore the massive glaring truth in question and try to shift the focus on to a lesser topic or an alternative subject altogether, in an effort to draw attention away from the critical truth which is out in the open."

Originally posted by thedman
reply to post by Tallone

 

Should get your eyes checked....

Here is photo of hole from right wing of AA77



Wider shot I posted earlier

Here are these pictures again that you claim show a hole. Did the window casings withstand the impact? I see no hole in the area you defined as being a hole except where windows were blown out of casings.

Really, I just don't get this. Unless it's an attempt to spread disinfo. Though I would never actually accuse you of that. Just saying that would make sense.

Originally posted by GhostLancer
reply to post by TrueAmerican

 

Were they sequestered, forever, somewhere and given new lives in a location impossible to escape and out of public awareness?

This has me thinking about The Prisoner...

"Who is Number One?" "You are, Number Six."

reply to post by network dude

As I have said before, I wish it was easy enough to just believe the OS, it would make things so much easier. There are just too many strange things to deal with.

Eureka!

You've just summed up in a nutshell, the position of the vast majority of 'lay people' regarding 9/11.

It's just *so much easier, and comforting to believe what we are told, rather than believe this could be done to the world, on such a scale*.

This psychology is very understandable. 'They' rely on it.