I don't believe it was a 757, call me a fool, but your story is much too "easy" to explain it all. It's very selective and make good use of optical illusions. Just tell a believer what they want to hear and they'll believe you. Although that counts for both sides, those who say it's a Boeing 757 and those who say it's not. I'm convinced it was a flying object, no doubt, however I don't think it was a boeing 757. I think I've found the answer for once and for all. In the picture you outlined the plane, you can see it's tail indeed, however if you examine the outlined plane you'll see that the tail is different than a 757 tail. I see horizontal stabilizers on top of the vertical stabilizers, afaik a Boeing 757 does NOT have those ! Take a close look everyone and tell me, you'll see them, they're white !

I still want to hear the black box recording. In something this big, I don’t care about the families. This matter is of more importance than sparing a few people a few tears. Crying is very healthy anyway. It’s very necessary that we all know our government isn’t deceiving us. Nothing is going to make the loss of loved ones any easier or harder. I mean, doesn’t it just record the cockpit, anyway? It’s not like they’re actually going to hear their loved ones speaking. And what would be wrong with a transcript, if not the actual recording?

I highly doubt that local firefighters would be involved in any sort of a coverup. I highly doubt that local police officers would be involved in any sort of a government cover up. Cops and firemen are just average Joes like you and me…

Sure, and like the average Joe, they probably know almost nothing about what 757 wreckage looks like. I don’t see any blue seats. The only thing I can vaguely identify is the rim, and the one piece of recognizable debris that has AA colors on it. (The one on the lawn) I still can’t figure out why the engines wouldn’t be outside the building. At 40,000 lbs. apiece, it sure seems like they’d come off that way, doesn’t it? How in the hell do heavy engines like that get inside the building without making holes of their own? I’m still not sure about this one, but you did a fantastic job approaching this from a realistic standpoint. Nice work! A few things that had run through my mind, previously. 1) Who says whatever hit the building wasn’t custom built and/or painted to look like an AA 757? Engine type, in that case, wouldn’t necessarily be proof of anything. 2) Were the passengers really found and identified? I never heard a thing about this. It just kind of faded away. I think this is why many people are very confused about this. 3) Why was the security video that was confiscated never released/shown? Wouldn’t that clear this up once and for all, if they do indeed have a better video? 4) Have you ever been to a Top Fueler drag race? It's very tough to see any detail on something moving at 270-300MPH, as it passes (and that's with good track-side seats), much less 400-500MPH. Unless you saw it from a distance, you're not going to get much of a look at anything. Witnesses that were close to the Pentagon are less likely to have seen much at all. Witnesses who saw it from a distance aren't likely to have seen much detail either, since it was at a distance. Unless you saw it from a distance, and had a clear view of the entire approach, you probably wouldn't have seen much. [edit on 14-9-2004 by Damned]

At 40,000 lbs. apiece, it sure seems like they’d come off that way, doesn’t it? How in the hell do heavy engines like that get inside the building without making holes of their own?

40,000 pounds apiece. I believe you are mistaking the pounds of thrust the engines create for the weight of the engines.

How in the hell do heavy engines like that get inside the building without making holes of their own?

You obviously havent looked at many pictures other than the cropped ones put up by conspiracy sites. I've seen pics of the almost 100 foot wide hole that is much wider than the 50 foot distance between the outsides of the engines.

No, I looked it up at Boeing. All info on the plane is available there. Here are the technical specs. Much of that 255,000 lbs. (max take-off weight) is the engines, no doubt.

Right I looked at that page if you look next to the 40,000 lbs you see a figure in parenthesis of the kN equivalent of the lbs of thrust.

The actual engine is only about 3 maybe 4 feet tall at most. The Turbine in front of the engine and the large housing the engine sits in make it seem like the engine itself is enourmous. Look at the pic you posted you you can see light through the turbine showing the outline of the actual engine.

It still seems that they'd break off, or create holes of their own.

you do realize that there was an almost 100 feet wide hole left by the aircraft? you do realize the distance between the outsides of the enginge is about 50 feet? I would say that that hole is large enough to accomodate the engines as well as most of the plane.

Can you show me the 100 ft wide hole?

100 ft hole.... haha yeah right, thats a laugh a minute that, the hole was about 10 ft wide if that...

Thanks, abovetopsecret. I don't know how anybody could be close-minded enough to deny that the airplane hit after reading that whole artical. I finally have a site I can show my friends who don't believe that the plane hit.

Originally posted by Skibum you do realize that there was an almost 100 feet wide hole left by the aircraft? you do realize the distance between the outsides of the enginge is about 50 feet?

Please show me. That's the first I've heard of this. The hole shown in all the pics before the wall collapsed is definitely not 100ft. Not even close. It's small...not even wide enough for one of the engines to have entered without being mounted on the fuselage. In fact, it doesn't even look large enough for the fuselage to have entered. That's the whole controversy here. That video recreation thing that was posted in the first post doesn't take into account the wings or the engines. It just shows them disintigrating (or disappearing, really), which, IMO, isn't even close to rational. [edit on 14-9-2004 by Damned]

Herman, as long your friends don't ask you about where the pieces of the debris actually fit on the plane, you should be good to go!

- This post has been edited due to a warning - [edit on 15-9-2004 by zerocool]

Originally posted by Skibum you do realize that there was an almost 100 feet wide hole left by the aircraft? you do realize the distance between the outsides of the enginge is about 50 feet? I would say that that hole is large enough to accomodate the engines as well as most of the plane.

The height of the Pentagon is only 77ft. or so. There's no way there was 100ft hole, until it collapsed. I have no idea where you got that idea. The entire controversy is surrounded by the fact that the hole wasn't large enough for the engines to enter, at the span they were at. In fact, the hole didn't appear large enough for a 757 to enter, at all. Again, this is really my only beef with this. I don't see how there wouldn't be wing and engine debris outside the building. [edit on 14-9-2004 by Damned]

you could have a 100ft wide hole on the pentagon. I haven't seen anything that big. I am hoping someone provides a picture.