Reformed no-757 theorists weigh in here

a friend of mines wife is a med lab tech, ill see if she has any insight on DNA testing and what can cause the samples to be unusable. she'll shoot straight with me and if she doesnt know she wont pretend to.

my night job used to be to draw blood so i know a lot about what can cause a blood sample to be bad for normal testing but i wont pretend to be a DNA expert. it is a great question though...

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Well i do beleive that if the fire was hot enough to completely destroy the plane inside the Pentagon i think thier would have been enough heat to destroy DNA evidence.

Thaaaat's what I was waiting for you to get to. That's a big if. Again, we've seen inside, maybe, what seems to be:
an engine housing
a landing gear
engine parts
fuselage metal even! Big chunks and single sheets. Burnt but intact.
(See Roberts piece)

So the plane was not completely destroyed. So we have not reched your threshold for certain DNA degradation. I'm not saying the bodies of plane victims WERE there, it could poss have been an empty drone. This is a side point to my 757 impact case, tho importnat in determinin the nature of the crash. But if they were there, I'd think some may be too damged, the reports of ALL identified seem a bit fishy I admit, but also I think many, perhaps most, could be tagged.

Originally posted by Caustic Logic


Thaaaat's what I was waiting for you to get to. That's a big if. Again, we've seen inside, maybe, what seems to be:
an engine housing
a landing gear
engine parts
fuselage metal even! Big chunks and single sheets. Burnt but intact.
(See Roberts piece)

SO what happened to over 60 tons of the airplane. What we have seen does not even add up to few hundred pounds ?????

Originally posted by Caustic Logic
Once believed no 757 hit the pentagon?
Found that was wrong?

If undecided, skim these threads:
A 757 HIT the Pentagon: Cat Herder Classic Mega-thread! first post may be all you need...
Hardly proof a 757 didn't hit It doesn't get good until mid-page 2.

Come around to reason?

Or never believed it?

Or still believe it?
Say so below:
This one is not for me arguing so post whatever in peace.

I would just like to say that I came here as a no-757 theorist and since having been on this forum for a few years, I am no longer a no-757 theorist. It's these forums tht made me realize how many of the conspiracy web sites prey on people and try to manipulate and distort things. This is one of the few sites around that is truely honest. And it's because of the varying opinions that keep everyone in check.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
SO what happened to over 60 tons of the airplane. What we have seen does not even add up to few hundred pounds ?????

U1, my 2 cents--they rigged it to blow up on impact. The only way you get it all to "fit."

Sorry for the bad pun, it's late...

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

SO what happened to over 60 tons of the airplane. What we have seen does not even add up to few hundred pounds ?????

Well from the pictures I have seen there is well more than a few hundred pounds of plane parts. But seeing as the plane hit a solid wall at 500mph and liquafied, I don't think the investigators are going to sit around and photograph a million pieces of plane parts because someone actually thinks there wasn't a plane there or someone that thinks they managed to plant millions of plane parts at the scene at the exact moment of impact without anyone happening to notice.

You also have to take into account that there are alot of composite materials used in aircraft construction i.e. carbon fiber that would be incinerated and/or shatter into miniscule fragments with the impact.

Originally posted by snoopy

Well from the pictures I have seen there is well more than a few hundred pounds of plane parts. But seeing as the plane hit a solid wall at 500mph and liquafied,

Please show me the pics of parts that add up to more them a few hundred pounds. If the plane liquafied hitting the wall how did it punch through all 3 rings ?

Originally posted by ShAuNmAn-X
You also have to take into account that there are alot of composite materials used in aircraft construction i.e. carbon fiber that would be incinerated and/or shatter into miniscule fragments with the impact.

At least 90% of the plane is made of aluminum. Thier are only a few parts that are composites.

Also if the plane liquafied on contact how did it punch through all the rings.



[edit on 23-3-2007 by ULTIMA1]

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by snoopy

Well from the pictures I have seen there is well more than a few hundred pounds of plane parts. But seeing as the plane hit a solid wall at 500mph and liquafied,

Please show me the pics of parts that add up to more them a few hundred pounds. If the plane
[edit on 23-3-2007 by ULTIMA1]

Go look at the photos from the trial. Go look at the photos that are in the threads on this site. They are everywhere. Are you expecting someone to have photographed 60 tons of scraps left over form the plane? Tell us why anyone would bother to do that.

Why would you in any way think that the plane liquafying would keep it from puncturing 3 rings? In fact that's exactly how it was able to do so. Not to mention its a documented and well known phenomenon. Just go look at any test footage of planes hitting concrete at 500mph. They liquafy.

Originally posted by snoopy
Just go look at any test footage of planes hitting concrete at 500mph. They liquafy.

You can not compare an F-4 fighter made with steel to a commercial plane made of aluminum.

How does a liqufied plane go through a reinforced wall, 13 collums, and 3 interior walls and punch out the other side.

Didn't quite get it right here see below

[edit on 24-3-2007 by infinityoreilly]

Im slowly learning the ropes

WHO THE HELL ARE YOU PEOPLE AND WHERE DO YOU KEEP COMING FROM?


Oreilly, in your infinite wisdom, did you not SEE the evidence I provided with my explanations? That's 90% of what I provided: a clear view of something VERY DIFFERENT from a 16-footer. If you ARE visually impired that's fine, jut please don't say such dumb things about what you cannot know. I don't claim to read your mind cause I an't. If you can't see the evidence don't tell me I didn't show it. Perhaps my graphics are not as compelling as the photos you described to me, but at least I have shown them.




[edit on 20-3-2007 by Caustic Logic]
Lets see if i've got it this time. The perspective on the line extending from the left wingtip, with less than 200 ft to travel until reaching Pentagon is OK to you Caustic? You don't think it shound be parallel to fuseloge? I,m not going to contact Purdue people by the way because your the one using the graphic to make your point. Also i'm not visually impaired, but feel free to call me dumb.

The headline and paragragh preceding the graphics and the graphics themselves were originally posted by Caustic Logic on 20-3-2007@2:43 AM, I accidentally deleted that part of the quote my bad I'll try to not do that again,InfinityO'Reilly

[edit on 24-3-2007 by infinityoreilly]

Those parts we see photos of could have come from other aircraft, its just too bad we have no FBI or NTSB crime scene reports matching these parts to a 757 or to flight 77.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by snoopy
Just go look at any test footage of planes hitting concrete at 500mph. They liquafy.

You can not compare an F-4 fighter made with steel to a commercial plane made of aluminum.

How does a liqufied plane go through a reinforced wall, 13 collums, and 3 interior walls and punch out the other side.

Yes you absolutely can. And the liquafacation is the only way it was possible to go through that far. I think people have this misunderstanding that a plane literally turns into liquid or something. The plane shatters into millions of little pieces whos combines forece is still equal to that of the solid plane, only allowing it to flow much like a liquid. Hence it being able to leave some columns directly in the path still standing.

As opposed to some bomb or missle that magically zigzagged around the building.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Those parts we see photos of could have come from other aircraft, its just too bad we have no FBI or NTSB crime scene reports matching these parts to a 757 or to flight 77.

So somehow with millions of people watching, someone planted another plane's worth of parts across the lawn and in the building without anyone noticing?

Originally posted by snoopy
I don't think the investigators are going to sit around and photograph a million pieces of plane parts because someone actually thinks there wasn't a plane there or someone that thinks they managed to plant millions of plane parts at the scene at the exact moment of impact without anyone happening to notice.

Shouldn't a crime scene investigater document all evidence at any crime scene completely? Especially the crime of the century? Just wondering.

Originally posted by snoopy
Yes you absolutely can. And the liquafacation is the only way it was possible to go through that far. I think people have this misunderstanding that a plane literally turns into liquid or something. The plane shatters into millions of little pieces whos combines forece is still equal to that of the solid plane, only allowing it to flow much like a liquid. Hence it being able to leave some columns directly in the path still standing.

You might want to look at the photos of the inside of the Pentagon, a plane that was in millions of small pieces would not have done the amount of damage done.

How did the small little pieces punch the hole through the other side directly in line with where the main airframe ? The little pieces would have spread out all over and not left a path straight through.

Originally posted by snoopy
So somehow with millions of people watching, someone planted another plane's worth of parts across the lawn and in the building without anyone noticing?

Or maybe it wasn't a 757 of flight 77 that hit the Pentagon.

Originally posted by infinityoreilly
Shouldn't a crime scene investigater document all evidence at any crime scene completely? Especially the crime of the century? Just wondering.

Yes they should. Still wating for the FBI and NTSB crime scene reports.

[edit on 24-3-2007 by ULTIMA1]

[edit on 24-3-2007 by ULTIMA1]

Originally posted by Caustic Logic
So we disagree strongly on the PentaCon. Cool. I've answered all yer questions, feel free to skim around for them if you care to...

Okay, once upon a time, on September 11, 2001, President Bush was outta town, at Booker elementary, as hijacked planes started flying into things. At the Pentagon that morning, people may've been preparing for a celebratory ceremony (if so, soon cancelled and not reported as far as I've seen) to mark the 60th anniversary of the building's groundbreaking. President Bush was an expected visitor that day, before getting to the Oval Office to sign the agreed plans of action against Afghanistan put on his desk two days before, he’d stop by on his helicopter Marine One to the helipad on the Pentagon's west lawn and visit Rumsfeld for some reason. Secret Service showed up early, the place was crawling with them as the attacks began.
Another guy there was Alan Wallace, a 55-year-old firefighter, usually worked out of the Fort Myer fire station, but on Sept. 11 he was one of three firefighters assigned to the Pentagon's heliport. Along with crew members Mark Skipper and Dennis Young, Wallace arrived around 7:30 in the morning. There's a small fire house beneath the heliport tower, which few know, with a truck permanently there to handle fuel fired from crashed helicopters I guess.
Here's a map of the scene I made (scale at bottom no longer correct unless sized back up):

This graphic would suggest damage to side of the Pentagon should be spead over 200 ft of the exterior wall, not the 100ft you suggest. Or maybe the marks w/300 inbetween don't represent 300ft?

[edit on 25-3-2007 by infinityoreilly]

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Those parts we see photos of could have come from other aircraft, its just too bad we have no FBI or NTSB crime scene reports matching these parts to a 757 or to flight 77.

has anyone done a FOIA on it yet? cuz you are very correct in this statement. just wondering if anyones actually tried to get these reports.