Let's kill the Pentagon Missile attack once and for all., page 15

Originally posted by HowardRoark

Nope. Not even close. First of all it you look at the piece of debris on the ground, you will note that it is curved, bent into a U shape from the impact. The photograph is a 2 dimensional image of a 3 dimensional object, thus you get distortion. What looks like a curved line only looks that way because the piece of aluminum it is on is curved.

HAHAHAHA

Thanks SO much for pointing out the insanely OBVIOUS. How does that little bit of info discredity SMR? I love your debating tactics. When someone brings up something that discredits the official story, you like to then retort by just describing to us what we all see and/or read and/or hear with technical terms so as to look more professional, and you really don't even tackle the actual subject or detail in question.

So Kix brings to our attention the piece of debris in the above pic and how it's inconsistent with an AA 757. He goes into how the colors don't match especially. Haha, and then you try and make him look foolish by saying.."oh, well see, you're looking at a 3d object in only 2d, causing a distortion....." HAHAHAHAHA! So tell us something we DON'T know! I don't think that your incredibly helpful insight with that proves that an A is on that piece of debris. Also, you completely and (conveniently I might add) neglect the most CRUCIAL part, which is about the colors! Then you ALSO ignore a very important point he touched on, which is the absence of any markings on the grass from a 757 flying 2 feet above it! But I have to hand it to you, you sure all taught us about how a photo is a 2d representation of a 3d object. We have a regular old EINSTEIN with us!

Also, another example of your supreme debating method is in another thread, where someone shows that one pic of a person standing in the hole of the tower where the jet went through. The reason why they posted it, was because it defys the claims that there was an inferno warping steel that whole time because there were people in that area not burning alive, yet the tower was supposed to have been warping from thousands of degrees of heat.

Haha, and then so you come along and retort by talking about the size of the hole. You explain to us yet again what is obvious in your sophisticated method of wording by declaring how many beams were severed and broken in that pic and about the hole. You don't even talk about how the person could be there. Not until I called you on it to actually acknowledge it! HAAAAHAAAAHAAA! Good job. Keep it up.

Secondly, The AA logo on the plane stretches across both the fin and the rudder. Are you an airframe mechanic certified in 757s? If not, then I will not accept your claim that there are no rivet holes in the rudder assembly. The same thing goes for the wheel. Any given series of aircraft has numerous variations. Unless you can unequivocally prove that the picture of the intact landing gear is the exact same assembly that was on the plane that crashed into the Pentagon, then your comparison has no validity.

Ok, you can at the same time, look for a pic of an AA 757 that gives proof that that little piece DOES indicate a match. By the way, where are your qualifications????

You are so far off base on this one it is laughable.

Lets look at the pictures of the outermost exterior wall of the building.

edit: linked so as not to blow the margins.

www.geoffmetcalf.com...

Notice the large squares of stone? That is your Indiana limestone facade. Each panel appears to be about 16" x 24."

Now look again at the close up of the punch out of the exterior wall in the inner ring.

look closely at the outer wall. As you can see it is a single layer of face brick. It is a glazed, light collored brick to match the exterior limestone, but it is not limestone. In fact, if you look carefully at the top of the hole, you can see how the bricks flaked apart from the impact.

Haha, very nice. The outer layer is brick! Could it be maybe....limestone...cut into bricks? If you look at the bricks of the outer layer that are BROKEN, they are the SAME color inside than out. So they aren't GLAZED. I can't believe that even matters. Only you would want to point that out. And wow, bricks FLAKED! How amazing. I suppose limestone doesn't flake? There you go again..........

Behind that is a double wythe of common brick.

Finally, what you are calling reinforced concrete is not that at all. that is just a plaster wall of the type commonly built up until 30 years ago. The metal bars are a black iron framework that has a metal mesh attached to it. You can see the metal mesh on the left side of the hole. The plaster is applied to this mesh. You can see where the plaster still remains on the side of the hole.

What is interesting is that the pipe (which is covered with asbestos insulation BTW) that is on the left side of the hole and the plaster and mesh are visible in such a way that sugests that when the wall broke open from the impact, it made a bigger hole on the outside then it did on the inside. Notice the straight line of bricks along the left side of the hole. That and the presence of the pipe suggests that there was a pipe chase hidden behind the wall at this location. The chase was probably set into the exterior brick wall in such a way as to weaken it significantly at this point.

This part I'm not going to argue much because I'm not an expert on construction materials. Although, whether concrete or plaster and brick, it still penetrated mulitple walls in addition to the first heavily reinforced wall. This is still significant.

As for the "no parking sign," I don't know why it is there. My first guess is that there is a fresh air intake for the building nearby.

Oh, well actually, the sign is there cuz they don't want anyone blocking the big doors that lead to fantasyland, which is where the story comes from.