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.

 

Ingersoll Pentagon/Cab photos - please help?

page: 8
19
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 11:55 AM
link   
reply to post by samkent
 

reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


My comment of no damage was wrong, I know I am human and happy to admit them when I make them. There is some damage with the framing popping out and what looks like some separation where the glovebox is on the passengers side. Cannot see any other damage due to the glass and the drivers side of the dash appears ok, but not being able to see any of the dials is a bit troubling. Also looks like there is a dash mat on the drivers side, but not the passengers side which is also a bit troubling. I would call sever damage when the dash is where your feet go, there is some moderate damage.

According to Lloyd's account, the pole went through the windscreen and rested on the back seat. Why is the dash even damaged at all if the car got speared by a falling pole while driving? I could understand the dash getting damaged as people with sledge hammers went to work on it.



How do you figure I'm the one in desperation here?


The type of damage to the base of the poles is clear evidence of interference and staging of the event. By not having any explanation for this that fits the official story you are trying to shot the messenger and side track the debate.



I'm asking why you seem to think this doesn't apply to you.


I am not a certified traffic pole examiner. I have already stated experience with crash repair and metal work so you can put my comments in context.



Because you don't understand how the damage occured to a cab, it means there is some conspiracy afoot?


The cab does raise a lot of questions. The damage to the base of the poles is conclusive proof of tampering.



This claim has already been shown to be false. The object on the video footage was not only blurry as it was at a distance, the ticket pylon in the foreground was obstructing the view of the object so you cannot even accurately determine the size of the object even if the image was blurry.


There are two cameras that captured the event, one has a pylon in the way and the other does not. I am not aware how what the cameras captured was shown to be false. I know you have dismissed them as too hard or lack of experience to comment.



I invite you to prove me wrong.


1/ Camera showing small aircraft approach pentagon, not a 757.
2/ Lack of debris when first responders on scene, then debris in later shots.
3/ Piece of debris with 'c' on it in position out of line of sight from impact point.
4/ Poles brought down by plasma / oxy cutter or some other high temperature device.
5/ Lack of seats in wreckage, still waiting...

I know you have presented some debate about these issues, but not enough for me to to say I am wrong yet.




posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 12:05 PM
link   
reply to post by kwakakev
 





The cab does raise a lot of questions. The damage to the base of the poles is conclusive proof of tampering.


Yea the plane tampered with the uprightedness of the pole.



posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 01:05 PM
link   
K i've been traveling around ats for a while and i'm not really gonna take sides on this at the moment, but i believe i have a very valid question...... we are all in understanding that a plane hit this lightpole? How come the lightpole is absent of any damage except for the very top which is where the lightpole struck the vehicle? i'm confused..... how fast was this plane going>...? what was that lightpole made out of? i mean... a plane hit that pole and there is no damage.... now surely if you are saying that the plane struck the light at the very top where it is "decapitated", well i'd find it hard to believe that a plane traveling however fast.... i'm going to assume faster then your average car.... took off the top of that lightpole.... and left the head sitting right next to it...... again... please just note that there is NO dmg to the pole..... ntm if you look at all the remaining poles that are standing up..... there are two joints that connect the actually pole to the lamp... where are they if the rest is in tact?



posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 01:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by kwakakev
The cab does raise a lot of questions. The damage to the base of the poles is conclusive proof of tampering.


In one moment you say that you admit you do not have experience in light pole maintenance to diagnose proof of tampering, and in the next you say you're saying conclusive proof of tampering, which necessarily requires experience in light pole maintenance. One statement or the other must logically be incorrect.



There are two cameras that captured the event, one has a pylon in the way and the other does not. I am not aware how what the cameras captured was shown to be false. I know you have dismissed them as too hard or lack of experience to comment.


Your nonexperience in traffic pole maintenance has no bearing on the camera footage. I have shown you that the object you're claiming to be too small is of limited value because the object in question is out of focus and I have shown you animation which explains many of the objections you claim you have. Your insisting that the object is too small to be a 757 when we can't discern what the object even is, is a spurious argument.



1/ Camera showing small aircraft approach pentagon, not a 757.
2/ Lack of debris when first responders on scene, then debris in later shots.
3/ Piece of debris with 'c' on it in position out of line of sight from impact point.
4/ Poles brought down by plasma / oxy cutter or some other high temperature device.
5/ Lack of seats in wreckage, still waiting...


1) This has already been shown to be an incorrect assessment and a byproduct of what you yourself want to believe
2) This is your own bad interpretation. The first responders you've quoted stated the wreckage was all small pieces which is corroborated by the photos. They likewise said there were no large pieces that one would normally associate with a plane crash which is likewise corroborated by the photos. None of these first responders are denying that a plane actually crashed there and I would appreciate it if you would stop misrepresenting them into appearing that they are.
3) It has already been shown that personnel were picking up and moving pieces of wreckage around for collection, so your objection that this particular piece was out of place is immediately dismissable.
4) You've already admitted you have no expertise in lamp post maintenance so your speculation based upon the condition of said light pole is argumentative. For all you know, all the poles had these weld markings before the plane ever came around.
5) The lack of photos of seats is indicative of conspiracy only in your own mind. To everyone else, it only means that noone bothered to take photos of the seats. The photos that were taken of the engine components, the landing gear, the pieces of fuselage, and other parts, all make the absense of seat photos immaterial.

This is not evidence. This is an exercise in excuse making.


I know you have presented some debate about these issues, but not enough for me to to say I am wrong yet.


If you are of a mind to seriously suggest that the damage to the taxi was caused by some secret agent running out onto the highway during rush hour traffic and smashing the windshield with a sledgehammer, then we both know there is nothing on the planet you will accept that will ever entice you to say you are wrong yet. You know that and so do I.



posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 01:56 PM
link   


As you can see from the remains of the windshield hanging down over the steering wheel, the pole DID come through the windshield, and from the extensive damage from the dashboard being torn off and pushed downs it's clear there's much more extensive damage than what your imaginary guy running out into traffic with a sledgehammer would be able to accomplish.


The theory of some guy running around with a sledgehammer is not something which I brought up, nor one which I support. What I stated was this theory is a lot more believable than the moronic shill garbage you and your gullible buddies are pushing. You're excused though, since your lack of reading comprehension is no doubt directly proportional to your mental capacity.



The lightpole fell from the passenger side so this necessarily means the passenger side would have been damaged too (the passenger side window looks like a big chunk of glass is missing), but that's entirely moot as the extensive interior damage shows your entire argument to be moot.


Big chunk of glass missing from front passenger side door? Hardy, har, har! Where is the glass on the passenger side seat from the shattered window on the passenger side door? Oh yeah, I have the answer for you, someone vacuumed it up prior to the photo.



You conspiracy people keep insisting "pics, or it didn't happen". Here you have a pic, so therefore it did happen.


A picture of what? Damage to the Passenger side of the vehicle? Nooo! Damage to the hood or roof of the vehicle. Nooo! So what exactly does this picture prove? Isn't this picture consistent with the other pictures of the exterior of the vehicle? That's okay though, as I said, due to your obvious limitations, you're more than excused for not being able to completely comprehend the issue at hand. Of course, I do find your line of thinking extremely entertaining.



So, now you're in a dilemma of choosing between having to retract your abject paranoia, or having to denounce the very conspiracy websites you're getting all your information from. Which will it be?

One question. If I trade in my abject paranoia does that mean I become a full fledged delusional gullible shill with the reading comprehension and investigative skills of a garden slug? If so, I am game, but I will require some sort of compensation for this downgrade. Deal?



posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 02:04 PM
link   
reply to post by kwakakev
 


I am afraid that 8 pages in you are sounding more and more as just someone determined to hang on to a conspiracy whatever the evidence to the contrary.

And we haven't even touched on AA 77's flight data recorder. The final seconds were decoded only recently and the last parameters recorded were 4 feet altitude accompanied by off the scale deceleration :-

journalof911studies.com...

What is your explanation for this fdr recovered at the Pentagon holding the information that it does ?

Just a further thought on Lloyd's cab. Does it not seem odd to you that this damaged cab is still in his possession ? Pretty sloppy of these otherwise super genius perps to leave evidence like that around when forensic examination could provide a "smoking gun" (according to truthers anyway).



posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 02:12 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 




In one moment you say that you admit you do not have experience in light pole maintenance to diagnose proof of tampering, and in the next you say you're saying conclusive proof of tampering, which necessarily requires experience in light pole maintenance. One statement or the other must logically be incorrect.


I could see this coming from a mile off and these techniques are getting old. Don't like the message so shot the messenger. It is not rocket science to tell the difference between cut and ripped metal.



Your nonexperience in traffic pole maintenance has no bearing on the camera footage. I have shown you that the object you're claiming to be too small is of limited value because the object in question is out of focus and I have shown you animation which explains many of the objections you claim you have. Your insisting that the object is too small to be a 757 when we can't discern what the object even is, is a spurious argument.


Well this one may surprise you then, I am qualified in information technology and multimedia. This means I can stand up in court and talk about video, pixels and other media analysis, so according to your logic you must believe me now with these surveillance tapes. I did check out the video you had in the last link and its claim of how a 757 plane was in the pentagon surveillance video was surprising to say the least so I double checked it with the video from Judicial Watch because I have seen a lot of fake videos in relation to the 9/11 events.


Google Video Link


If there was anyway that a 757 was captured with these videos it would have stopped all debate about this in its tracks and we would not be here. There is no nose of the plane visible in the surveillance tape as your video claims, so what was flying is smaller than a 757. If you are able to provide access to the master versions of the tapes I would be happy to review them. While there is a little loss of quality with the next image, it does prove this point and saves you the time of reconfirming these facts.




posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 02:17 PM
link   
reply to post by SphinxMontreal
 





Big chunk of glass missing from front passenger side door? Hardy, har, har! Where is the glass on the passenger side seat from the shattered window on the passenger side door? Oh yeah, I have the answer for you, someone vacuumed it up prior to the photo.


Haven't you ever driven a damaged car home? You brush the glass off the seat and put on glasses and enjoy the breeze. Why is it so sinister to not see glass on the seat? And like the gentleman said if the car is part of some big conspiracy why didn't the FBI confiscate it. They could have done so days or weeks after the even and no one would have questioned it. But it's still at his home 10 years later?

The smoking gun has been sitting in his back yard for ten years? That's a good one. No wonder the whole truther movement resides only in cyberspace.


edit on 14-7-2011 by samkent because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 02:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Alfie1
 




What is your explanation for this fdr recovered at the Pentagon holding the information that it does ?


Its bogus, with NIST having no problem in making stuff up and lying to the public, I am certain that the Pentagon has the same lack of ethics, morality and public responsibility.



Just a further thought on Lloyd's cab. Does it not seem odd to you that this damaged cab is still in his possession ? Pretty sloppy of these otherwise super genius perps to leave evidence like that around when forensic examination could provide a "smoking gun" (according to truthers anyway).


It was a big job and there are loose ends all over the place if you know where to look.
edit on 14-7-2011 by kwakakev because: spelling 'having'



posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 02:49 PM
link   
reply to post by kwakakev
 


If you think the fdr is bogus you must have thought out how you can fake not only the thousands and thousands of recorded parameters in AA 77's final flight but in it's previous 10 or 11 flights as well because they are also there.

How is it done ?



posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 03:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Alfie1
 


The high quality flight simulators can record to FRD. As for the previous flights, either replay them or just cut and paste as it is just data.



posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 06:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
You didn't succeeed in steering the discussion away from having to address this in that last thread so it should come as no surprise to you that you're unable to steer the discussion away from having to address this in this thread.

GoodOlDave, you have got it wrong, again.

The discussion in this thread was about the facts of an alleged Ingersoll photo showing a light pole lying on top of the cab.

I certainly haven't tried to steer the discussion away from your admission that you failed to get your facts straight.



posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 10:19 PM
link   
reply to post by kwakakev
 




The high quality flight simulators can record to FRD. As for the previous flights, either replay them or just cut and paste as it is just data.


Isn't it part of the conspiracy mantra that no one could fly that profile? Even an expert pilot.



posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 11:39 PM
link   
sorry if im being rude but i was just wondering if someone would check my question on page 8.... not to mention i would like to ask another question on the topic.... how come this street lamp is different then all surrounding street lamps.... there are a few pictures with street lamps in the background.... and even one picture with another street lamp that is very close to the one in question... maybe only a few meters (30 or so?)..... anywho..... how come the street lamp in question is angular at the top with a bottom-only lightbulb.... excuse the terminology... when all other lamps in the vicinity are perfectly straight up and down.... and have a dual arm that leads to the actual light bulb? this one street lamp is clearly different....



posted on Jul, 15 2011 @ 02:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by kwakakev
reply to post by Alfie1
 


The high quality flight simulators can record to FRD. As for the previous flights, either replay them or just cut and paste as it is just data.


Outside of conspiracy site speculation can you offer any evidence at all to support your suggestion ? Has anyone ever done it ?

And you are of course introducing another raft of experts into your ever expanding "inside job". Why do you suppose flight simulator technicians and flight data recorder experts would join together in a plot to murder thousands of fellow citizens and remain forever silent ?



posted on Jul, 15 2011 @ 02:39 AM
link   


Haven't you ever driven a damaged car home? You brush the glass off the seat and put on glasses and enjoy the breeze. Why is it so sinister to not see glass on the seat?


Are you saying Mr. England drove the damaged vehicle home with a gaping hole to the shattered front windshield? Beside it being illegal and extremely dangerous to drive with a shattered windshield, how exactly was he able to see? Oh, and yeah, he wasn't worried about the extremely dangerous shattered front windshield, he was worried about the glass pieces on the passenger seat instead so he brushed them off???



And like the gentleman said if the car is part of some big conspiracy why didn't the FBI confiscate it. They could have done so days or weeks after the even and no one would have questioned it. But it's still at his home 10 years later? The smoking gun has been sitting in his back yard for ten years? That's a good one.


There are photos of this plant vehicle all over the web. Why should the FBI confiscate this vehicle - what is there to hide when everyone has seen the photos? Does this "smoking gun" have some top secret evidence which can be extracted from it to break the 911 case wide open?



No wonder the whole truther movement resides only in cyberspace.

Unlike you, I don't give a debunker's rear end where the truth movement or anyone else resides. However, considering your lack of knowledge about vehicle laws and road safety, I think YOU should stay safely in your residence and avoid getting behind the wheel of an automobile.

edit on 15-7-2011 by SphinxMontreal because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 15 2011 @ 02:56 AM
link   


And you are of course introducing another raft of experts into your ever expanding "inside job". Why do you suppose flight simulator technicians and flight data recorder experts would join together in a plot to murder thousands of fellow citizens and remain forever silent ?


Controllers' 9/11 Tape Destroyed, Report Says
www.washingtonpost.com...

So if this FAA manager can destroy such key evidence without turning it into the FBI, why can't the other aircraft experts be persuaded to get it on the game and do what has to be done for the team? Do you know anyone who doesn't value a raise and a promotion?

As for the comment, "plot to murder thousands of fellow citizens and remain forever silent", spare us the Hollywood drama queen rhetoric.



posted on Jul, 15 2011 @ 04:25 AM
link   
reply to post by SphinxMontreal
 


The point that you are so obviously missing is that the cab's continued physical existence means that it could be forensically examined which you can't of course do with any number of photos.

Forensic scientists claim that every contact leaves a trace, however miniscule or microscopic. A careful forensic examination of the cab, which appears to have been left as it was on 9/11, ought to be able to show whether a light pole ever entered it and, if not, what perhaps did.

It is often claimed by truthers that the perps were very careful to eliminate forensic evidence. Sending all the WTC steel off to China pronto for example. ( not true of course because there are tons and tons and tons of it stored in hangar 17 at JFK)

Nonetheless that is the claim so it is a bizarre anomaly that this cab should have survived all these years with all the wild speculation swirling around it. Any perps seem pretty laid back about tests being carried out on it.



posted on Jul, 15 2011 @ 05:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Alfie1
 




Outside of conspiracy site speculation can you offer any evidence at all to support your suggestion ? Has anyone ever done it ?


Check out pilotsfor911truth.org... for a professional independent analysis. There are heaps of questions and inconsistencies.



And you are of course introducing another raft of experts into your ever expanding "inside job". Why do you suppose flight simulator technicians and flight data recorder experts would join together in a plot to murder thousands of fellow citizens and remain forever silent ?


Peace is not good for profits if you are in the war business. For the prime suspects with the inside job whodidit.org...



posted on Jul, 15 2011 @ 07:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by kwakakev


Peace is not good for profits if you are in the war business. For the prime suspects with the inside job whodidit.org...


Have the perps made more than it cost to finance do you think? Given that your inside job now includes FDR experts, military missile launchers, a missile, planes, numerous evidence planters, explosive experts, explosives, FBI insiders, CIA insiders and Pentagon employees it sounds like it might have cost a lot.



new topics

top topics



 
19
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join