Chemtrails

  • We are currently upgrading MFK. thanks! -neo
Aqua Sanctuary;4261746; said:
Because the evidence has never, ever been obliterated before.. Never

There was absolutely nothing to even suggest a plane crash.
Click to expand...

Nothing? :WHOA: Video and a huge whole is nothing?

There is no "proof" that it was caused by anything else either!
 
Knowdafish;4261852; said:
Nothing? :WHOA: Video and a huge whole is nothing?

There is no "proof" that it was caused by anything else either!
Click to expand...

come on your gonna need to be better than that! video? you mean the one that doesnt show a plane hitting the pentagon? you wanna talk about the hole? look at the hole and look at the size of the 757 and see if it adds up.

there isnt any "proof" that anything else hit it is cuz fbi and other people involved in this cover up was quickly at the scene after it happen. picking up all the evidence. confiscating all the camera's from gas stations, hotels etc...ask yourself this. if a 757 "DID" hit the pentagon. why not release all the other vids? but out of all the video they release the vid that shows no plane hitting the pentagon. releasing other vids would end all conspiracy.
 
nikond70s;4262671; said:
come on your gonna need to be better than that! video? you mean the one that doesnt show a plane hitting the pentagon? you wanna talk about the hole? look at the hole and look at the size of the 757 and see if it adds up.

there isnt any "proof" that anything else hit it is cuz fbi and other people involved in this cover up was quickly at the scene after it happen. picking up all the evidence. confiscating all the camera's from gas stations, hotels etc...ask yourself this. if a 757 "DID" hit the pentagon. why not release all the other vids? but out of all the video they release the vid that shows no plane hitting the pentagon. releasing other vids would end all conspiracy.
Click to expand...
I always hear that argument. And its completely invalid.
You know what happens when someone robs a convenience store and shoots the clerk? The cops show up and take all the evidence. They dont give it back later, or put it on the news, they just take it and file it away for court. Why dont they release the vids to quiet conspiracy nuts? Because its not worth their time. They dont care what you think happened, and have nothing to prove. They did their investigation and moved on.
 
I got this from http://www.livescience.com/strangenews/top10-conspiracy-theories-1.html#comments

LiveScience said:
Alright kids, I am an Engineer (structural). For all those who believe that there is no way a plane could have done the damage it did-

An itty-bitty 22 caliber bullet can break up a brick or puncture a piece of steel much "stronger" than itself. The reason?

Newton made it clear a very long time ago and most of the conspiracy folks tend to keep one thing out of their "calcs". MASS

I hear things like "an aluminum plane could not have...." and, once I'm done rolling my eyes, remind those who think that way that a passenger jet is no piece of tinfoil. It has to withstand a great number of stresses. Simply pressurizing the cabin throughout flight makes the aircraft pretty sturdy. When you add in all the varying loads, speeds, and dropping many, many tons onto some rubber tires, suddenly that piece of tinfoil has some muscle.

Those aircraft weighed a great many tons. Those buildings could have been solid steel columns and the impact would have messed them up. They did lose acceleration rather quickly. That is the reason they didn't come out the other side and was due to the "lightweight" materials crashing into much more resistant material (this is simplified).

As for the towers, luckily the engineers got it right when they designed the buildings. Tall building are supposed to collapse straight down. That's because they are designed to stand straight up. They are engineered to handle some lateral loading (wind, seismic) but if they were designed in such a way that they "fell over" then skyscrapers would be toppling over in a strong wind or quake.

Each floor is part of a system. It is ridiculous to think that a building that big can "support" itself when losing 2 or 3 floors. Once a couple of the main supports were weakened by fire (yes, flame will weaken steel girders that big) then the system collapses. The few supports left were holding up every floor on top of it for the very first time. Once it went, the lower floors were being asked to withstand even more and VIOLA! the straight down.



So please, if you want to listen to "evidence" at least get it from more than one source. If you are not an engineer then you cannot have an educated opinion. Spouting off about "Aluminum vs. concrete" and "Buildings don't fall that way" make sure the facts check out.
Click to expand...
 
Knowdafish;4263635; said:
True, and it's also true that most conspiracy theorists have never taken a Physics class either! :D :ROFL:
Click to expand...

Concidering that a plane somehow snuck in between the light poles directly in front of the impact zone.

Just look closer. There is no room for a plane to have approached and crashed leaving them intact.
 
Thalan;4263462; said:
I always hear that argument. And its completely invalid.
You know what happens when someone robs a convenience store and shoots the clerk? The cops show up and take all the evidence. They dont give it back later, or put it on the news, they just take it and file it away for court. Why dont they release the vids to quiet conspiracy nuts? Because its not worth their time. They dont care what you think happened, and have nothing to prove. They did their investigation and moved on.
Click to expand...

uh they do show the vids to catch the wanted man. they dont release the vids because they dont want the public to know the truth. to people like you that believes the official story. and how is it not worth the time? simply put it on the internet on the news. and you wanna talk about physics? lol ask any physicist or any real people that fly planes. they would tell you its super hard to fly a 757 so low at that speed above ground.

a 757 is like 100+ feet accross. the hole in the pentagon is like 16 feet wide? yeah common sense. look at the pictures of the pentagon look around the damage....windows and all are still in tack when the wings of the 757 should damage it. the damage doesnt even fit the 757. and no debris from the plane is left? thats funny. why were people walking around the fields picking up stuff? why make it so shady? why were people carring a big box covered in a blue tarp? what was in there. dont we have the right to know? but yet lil answer.

i think you need to take a physic class and use common sense and do your research outside the U.S media
 
lets look at some of the pictures of the pentagon here are a few quick image search on google

pentagon-aerial.jpg


pentagon7jj.jpg


so a 757 with a wingspan of 100+ feet with 2 large engine on each side....made this damage? funny how there isnt really any damage around the hole. and remember, it collapse after the impact.
 
now lets look at the vid.

[YT]<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/lsWZHKIg3Cs&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/lsWZHKIg3Cs&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>[/YT]

do you see a plane? after years they release this crap? this comes from one of the most secure building in the world. and they show this crappy video?

in fact, how the heck did a plane even got so close to the pentagon? if you didn tknow. no planes without radio contact can fly over or near the pentagon. when a plane flys by with no radtio contact. they fly jet planes up there to see whats going on. and the 757 was off radio contacts for almost an hour flying un noticed. and the pentagon has its own defense missle that can shoot down a plane.


heres another good vid that has a lot of questions.

[YT]<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/8rxi793UTHg&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/8rxi793UTHg&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>[/YT]
 
nikond70s;4263879; said:
.......in fact, how the heck did a plane even got so close to the pentagon? if you didn tknow. no planes without radio contact can fly over or near the pentagon. when a plane flys by with no radtio contact. they fly jet planes up there to see whats going on. and the 757 was off radio contacts for almost an hour flying un noticed. and the pentagon has its own defense missle that can shoot down a plane.
Click to expand...

Not true! Maybe now, but not then! And definitely not when this plane crashed at the White House!!

http://tech.mit.edu/V114/N40/crash.40w.html

There is no way to scramble the jets quick enough, and get them on location before a plane enters a VERY small restricted airspace. They would have to have fighter jets in the air and in the vicinity 24/7!

Besides that, there was no restricted airspace over the Pentagon then!


More proof that dispells all of your myths!! :D


  • Claim: The hole in Pentagon is too small to be caused by a Plane.

Discussed here:
http://www.popularmechanics.com/tech...42.html?page=6
http://www.fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/bu...PDF/b03017.pdf
http://www.oilempire.us/pentagon-photos.html

In Brief: When American Airlines Flight 77 hit the Pentagon's exterior wall, Ring E, it created a hole approximately 75 ft. wide, according to the ASCE Pentagon Building Performance Report. The exterior facade collapsed a little less than 40 minutes after impact, but ASCE based its measurements of the original hole on the number of first-floor support columns that were destroyed or damaged. Computer simulations confirmed the findings. Why wasn't the hole as wide as a 757's 124-ft.-10-in. wingspan? A crashing jet doesn't punch a cartoon-like outline of itself into a reinforced concrete building.

​
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  • Claim: There was no identifiable plane debris at Pentagon. The small amount of debris found could be carried away by hand.
Discussed here:
http://www.911myths.com/html/757_wreckage.html
http://www.fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/bu...PDF/b03017.pdf

In Brief: There definitely was plane debris at the site. The impact damage also fit that of an Airplane. The plane travelling at a very high speed and hitting a hard wall creates a huge impact force. This force destroys everything into small pieces.

Consider this:

There was debris. If it was carried there before the attack, all the people driving past Pentagon could have caught them redhanded. If it was carried there after the attack, the focus of all the people on the motorway was already at Pentagon. The debris could not have been carried there before or afterwards. A Plane crashed there.

​
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  • Claim: A Missile hit The Pentagon.
Discussed here:
http://www.fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/bu...PDF/b03017.pdf
http://eric.bart.free.fr/iwpb/witness.html
In Brief: The number of eyewitnesses mentioning a plane is huge. The number of eyewitnesses mentioning a missile is zero. The impact damage fits that of a plane.

Pentagon is located in a big city. Pentagon is close to a busy motorway. Could anyone hit Pentagon with a missile, claim it to be a plane and get away with it without risking the operation? No.

​
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  • Claim: How could the passengers be identified if the plane was so destroyed? / There were no passengers.
Discussed here:
http://www.dcmilitary.com/dcmilitary.../12279-1.shtml
http://www.911myths.com/html/bodies_identified.html
In Brief: What some experts have called "the most comprehensive forensic investigation in U.S. history" ended Nov. 16 with the identification of 184 of the 189 who died in the terrorist attack on the Pentagon.

Teams of forensic scientists, under the direction of Demris Lee, technical leader of the Nuclear DNA Section, took over the difficult chore of generating a DNA profile of the victims. Their work included not only the Pentagon crash victims, but the victims of the Somerset County crash as well. Every one of the organization's 102 DNA analysts, sample processors, logistics staff, and administrative personnel were involved -- from collecting, tracking, analyzing DNA samples, and gathering and logging DNA reference material to preparing DNA reports. For 18 days following the terrorist attacks, AFDIL employees worked on 12-hour shifts, seven days a week to meet the mission requirements.

There were the bodies and passengers we are told to. Or the 102 analysts are in on the conspiracy. Which one is more likely?

​
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  • Claim: A Video clearly showing Pentagon hit has not been released / there are 85 tapes from Pentagon.
Discussed here:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/05/16/pen...deo/index.html
http://www.fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/bu...PDF/b03017.pdf
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.p...ght=doubletree
http://flight77.info/85videos.html
In Brief: Video showing the impact from the Pentagon Checkpoint has been released. Video showing the fireball from the Doubletree Hotel camera has been released.

Videos have been evidence for the Moussaoui trial, thus not released until 2006. A FOIA request was filled in a effort to get video footage released of the Pentagon crash. FBI has said 85 videos were potentially responsive to a FOIA request, but a huge majority of them shows neither the Pentagon crash site, nor the impact. Or show the area only after the impact. Only a couple of them show anything at all.​
So there are no 85 tapes from Pentagon. There are 85 tapes. Many of these videotapes do not have footage of the Pentagon at all. Instead, many have footage of the WTC, some are security video tapes taken from a Kinko's in Florida, etc. Some that show the Pentagon were taken days after the attacks, and some in the evening of 9/11/2001.​
Why did agent Maguire (FBI) talk about 85 tapes, then? Why did she think these 85 tapes were potentially responsive to a FOIA request, eventhough all of them were not even of the Pentagon area?

The answer lies in the way she determined which tapes could possibly be potentially responsive to a FOIA request.​
​
"I searched a series of FBI databases ... and determined that the FBI possessed 85 videotapes that might be potentially responsive to plaintiff's FOIA request. This determination was based on videotapes that had been submitted into FBI evidence, sent directly to the FBI laboratory in Quantico, Virginia, and/or obtained by the FBI's Washington Field Office."
​
The Florida and WTC tapes are included, because Maguire determined that all tapes sent to Quantico, Virginia could be potentially responsive to the FOIA request. The Florida and WTC tapes included in this 85 tape count were all received at Quantico, so she included those tapes to the 85 tapes. Obviously, as all tapes sent to Quantico were not from the Pentagon, she determined that only a few show anything relevant at all.

In a nutshell, there are no 85 tapes from Pentagon. There are 85 tapes that an agent determined could potentially show something, since they were received at Quantico, Virginia, or Washington Field Office. Agent Maguire determined, that only 1 videotape showed the impact. This is the Pentagon Checkpoint tape.
​
Surveillance cameras are not 24 frames per second cameras and they are not located in anticipation of an airline attack. We have already seen the impact from one angle and the fireball from two angles. We know there was a plane from all the evidence and eyewitnesses above. Why would we still need to see a crystal clear video?

Remember. If there was a clear video, conspiracy theorists would say it was manipulated and photoshopped. That has already been stated by the likes of David Ray Griffin and others. There is always a conspiracy theory.​
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  • Claim: The Flight 77 Flight Data Recorder data is faked.
Discussed here:
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=66047
http://www.ntsb.gov/info/AAL77_fdr.pdf
In Brief: Simply. It is not faked. The analysis claiming it's fake do not take into account everything needed. The data verifies everything about plane hitting the Pentagon.

Why would they leave fake information to be found at the Pentagon, then release it to the public for scrutiny? If the FDR data is real, the plane hit Pentagon. If it's faked, why would they fake it not to show a hit?

​
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  • Claim: The fallen light poles are suspicious.
Discussed here:
http://eric.bart.free.fr/iwpb/witness.html
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.p...n+lightpol es
In Brief: Multiple eyewitnesses have witnessed the plane hitting the light poles.

Consider the following:

How could a missile clip light poles? We have all the evidence and eyewitnesses supporting a plane. Why would they have to fake a light pole story? What purpose would that serve?

​
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  • Claim: Hani Hanjour could not pilot the plane into the Pentagon, making such difficult turns.
Discussed here:
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/911/index.html
http://www.911myths.com/Another_Expert.pdf
http://www.salon.com/tech/col/smith/...skthepilot186/
Google video. Amateur with a simulator hitting the Pentagon 3/3 times. Starts at 27:40.
In Brief: Hani Hanjour's flying was hardly the show-quality demonstration often described. The manoeuvres required of the hijackers were within their capabilities, they were performed without any degree of finesse and resulted in damage to the targets only after desperate overmanoeuvring of the planes. Landing a plane is difficult. Flying it into something is easier.

An amateur pilot in Holland was able to hit Pentagon 3/3 times, when he tried it with a simulator. Hanjour had enough skills to fly a plane. He didn't have to land.
​
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  • Claim: Pentagon had missile batteries to protect it/Pentagon was restricted airspace.
Discussed here:
http://www.911myths.com/html/pentagon_missile_batteries.html
http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=2929657&postcount=35
In Brief: If they did exist then wouldn&#8217;t you have expected Pentagon employees to also have raised this question?

An automatic shoot-down of anything that violated the Pentagon airspace is not possible. The Pentagon is located very close to the approach for Washingtons Ronald Reagan airport.

There has not been any reports of an existence of any missile batteries before 9/11.
​
What comes to restricted airspace over Pentagon, the low altitude chart for the DC area depicts no prohibited airspace above or around the Pentagon.
​
​





​
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  • Claim: Why did the hijackers hit the only part of The Pentagon that was recently renovated?
Discussed here:
http://renovation.pentagon.mil/projects.htm
http://renovation.pentagon.mil/projects-W1.htm
​


In Brief: What actually WAS renovated was Wedge 1. Not the entire side of the Pentagon.

Pentagon consists of 5 Wedges, which consist of a corner and half the length of one side of the Pentagon to both directions from the corner.

Wedge 1, approximately 1 million square feet, was the first fifth of above ground space in the Pentagon to undergo renovation. Structural demolition and the abatement of hazardous materials began in 1998, followed by the installation of new utilities and the build-out of tenant areas. A phased move-in of tenants began in February 2000, with the last tenant move-in completed February 6, 2003.

So the plane hit the side of the Pentagon, which consisted of Wedge 1 to the right of the impact zone and Wedge 2 to the left of the impact zone.

The whole Pentagon is undergoing renovation. That part was renovated first, because it is Wedge Number 1. It was also on a direct flight path of the plane.

There is nothing strange about this.
​





​
Recommended Pentagon reading for the interested:

 http://www.fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/build03/PDF/b03017.pdf
http://www.911myths.com/html/pentagon.html
http://forums.randi.org/forumdisplay.php?f=64
http://eric.bart.free.fr/iwpb/witness.html
http://www.ntsb.gov/info/AAL77_fdr.pdf




So sorry that your conspiracy theory has.........


failed.gif






I did enjoy the (rather brief :D) debate though!
​
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
MonsterFishKeepers.com
Top Bottom