Arlington Topography, Obstacles Make American 77 Final Leg Impossible

This may give you guys a hint why we are taking our time...

pilotsfor911truth.org...

But then again, i guess you'll never know the reason as you're too scared to register to P4T forums. But others will. Matter of fact, our registration stats have nver been higher.

Regards


typo




[edit on 14-4-2008 by johndoex]

Originally posted by johndoex
This may give you guys a hint why we are taking our time...

pilotsfor911truth.org...

But then again, i guess you'll never know the reason as you're too scared to register to P4T forums. But others will. Matter of fact, our registration stats have nver been higher.

Regards
[edit on 14-4-2008 by johndoex]

You Must Be Logged in For Full Forum Access. Log In here. Not Registered? Register here. Thank you.

Strangely enough, that does help me understand. It also helps explain why I refuse to register and add to your numbers. It ain't fear, buddy.

Originally posted by johndoex
This may give you guys a hint why we are taking our time...

pilotsfor911truth.org...

But then again, i guess you'll never know the reason as you're too scared to register to P4T forums. But others will. Matter of fact, our registration stats have nver been higher.

Regards

Here's some people you and your buddies at CIT failed to interview:

/43vcpl

Why don't you send them a link to your site so they can comment?

Originally posted by johndoex

But then again, i guess you'll never know the reason as you're too scared to register to P4T forums. But others will. Matter of fact, our registration stats have nver been higher.

Who cares about the truth? They have more members on their website!!! Thats what PFFFT is all about.

I'm so glad you are working on the mistakes you made.

Has Reheat given you what you were asking him for?

March 16th it was pointed out to Rob and co, that his math was flawed. He told us there would be corrections. Well it's been over a month. Where is this math? Where is the 15 page PDF file you were proof reading?

Love,

The young grasshopper.

Since Rob is posting on many other threads, I was hoping this BUMP would allow him the opportunity to resubmit his calculations here. The errant ones that were pointed out to him a month ago.

Originally posted by johndoex
This may give you guys a hint why we are taking our time...

pilotsfor911truth.org...

Quoting myself for CO since he is really starting to look silly when he keeps asking and others know the reason.

Then again, i dont think i can help CO from looking silly.

Enjoying your weekend on ATS CO?

Regards.

typo

[edit on 20-4-2008 by johndoex]

reply to post by johndoex


Rob,

You know that last thing i will do is sign up for your forum. It is well known you ban people that don't agree with you.

Instead of pimping your website, why can't you just post your reasons here. Or have Craig do it since he started this thread.

My weekend is ok...my son and I are sitting on the couch watching Tigger & Pooh on the Disney channel. Hopefully he will feel better and we can go to the beach today.

ETA childish link removed

It is nice to see Rob's caculations appear here again - his caclulation being that it's best keep his re-writing out of the public eye until he's perfected the spin or until never, after people give up and forget.

But that aside, I had a question for the pilots here, including Rob if he likes, but I don't understand Gs and the math of it all. But when I hear 11.2, I think yeah, that's probably impossible, right?

Now when I hear that 11.2 Gs is cause by a plane descending what I figure is about 1 foot for every 10 forward, based on the presumptions Rob uses, that ain't too steep. That doesn't SEEM impossible at all to me as a long shot. It doesn't seem like 11.2 G material, not that I know what would be... I understand he did some subdividing and stuff... but even if it went steeper then level and that added some pressure it just doesn't seem very close to some impossible scenario.

So the question is is this amateur thinking correct? And if so, why did it escape the founder of Pilots For 9/11 Truth?



[edit on 20-4-2008 by Caustic Logic]

Isnt it ironic that our harshest critics refuse to research information they crtique, instead hope to get it third hand?

I guess thats the difference between "obsession" and "critque"

Ask Boone for the information. He was on the other day looking at it linked from here. But he wont post it here, because then that will prove CO wrong claiming we "ban anyone who disagrees". Why is it "Duh-Bunkers" never correct each other?

As you were....

typo


[edit on 21-4-2008 by johndoex]

reply to post by johndoex


Rob,

Craig Ranke started this thread. I requested that if you don't want to show your corrected math here, perhaps Craig would.

Again, I have no desire to go to your website that refuses any evidence that does not support your fantasy.

Bar-b-q season is upon us...oh..i was going to mention something about a designer grill cover....nah...

 

Perhaps we should direct our attentions away from each other and back to the Actual topic of discussion.

» 9/11 Conspiracies » Arlington Topography, Obstacles Make American 77 Final Leg Impossible » Post Reply

What say ye? ALL.



 

reply to post by 12m8keall2c


Great Idea ... it's been a month and a 1/2 and we are still waiting for the correct math from Rob or Craig.

Originally posted by 12m8keall2c
 

Perhaps we should direct our attentions away from each other and back to the Actual topic of discussion.

» 9/11 Conspiracies » Arlington Topography, Obstacles Make American 77 Final Leg Impossible » Post Reply

What say ye? ALL.

 

Well since you asked what say we...

The original assertion it seems has been proven false, and now there is no subject to discuss except how or why the original incorrect assertion was put forward, why there's still no public correction issued, and nothing to talk about except the people involved. So basically the thread can serve no purpose except this, unless someone wants to go back into the details of topography. As I see it this makes the final leg of flight a bit tricky but doable, since all evidence still indicates it was done, irrelevant thought exercises borne out in bad math aside.

I'm happy to let it go. Can we do a once-monthly reminder though, or does JDX get off free?

Another great piece of work Craig. Starred and Flagged.

I'm fairly convinced now more than ever, this was either a military jet painted to look like an AA passenger jet, or an actual AA passenger jet rigged up to be able to deploy a Cruise missile, and then a subsequent flyover.

Especially after watching this video posted buy IvanZana: (pay close attention to the first 15 seconds, and look how quickly this thing can be deployed.) Thise would explain some of the strange eye witness accounts as well, being that a cruise missile looks like a small while plane.

www.youtube.com...

Also after watching 2 videos of what the aftermath looks like when one of these hits a reinforced concrete structure on a somewhat level angle. The exit holes are identical in size, and again round. after going through a concrete structure made up of several walls. Too bad I can no longer find the videos.

Then there's the fireball caught by the security camera is a very good match to the fireball that is created when a Cruise missile hits a hard target.

Last but not least theres the damage to the Pentagon, and the perfect circular exit hole. All pretty much in accordance to what you'd expect to see if a Cruise missile hit the pentagon on the official flight path. Not a 767 made of aluminum. It wouldn't get passed the second reinforced wall, let alone the 5-7 we are suppposed to believe it did. Maybe, and that a huge maybe, the engines could get through a couple of those newly re-inforced walls, but not the amount we are led to believe. Also the engines were'nt even found that deep in the pentagon.

This supposed kinetic ball of fire that came from a 767 , again even if true, would lose a huge amount if not all of it's steam after hitting the second inside wall of the 1st ring. It's like trying to fire an armor piercing bullet through 5 kevlar vests that are all spaced out 3 feet from each other. That round would bounce off the second vest. You'd get a very different result if 5 vests worth of kevlar was all tightly packed together.

I'm sorry this ficticeous kinetic gaseous fireball isn't going to do that, I don't care if this 767 was doing 1,000 mph, and that side of the Pentagon wasn't just recently re-inforced to stop missile attacks (the fact that this terrorist who couldn't even fly a Cessna hit that particular side after circleing around is damning in and of itself) I mean sheesh, even this fake official story is so unbelievable, it insults every Americans intelligence to even think anyone would buy it.

But I don't think the government thought it'd even hold up this long, it didn't need to, they just needed it to hold up long enough to pass a few new Acts, and gain public support to invade Iraq. The fact that this myth is still believed today probably gives Bush and friends a pretty good laugh.

But to get back on topic, they would have done better to "plant" one of the engines outside the exit hole. Instead of a piece of landing gear. They also should have forgotten the whole lightpole thing. I mean the more variables you have to account for , the more likely your ruse is going to be uncovered, like it has been.

And before anyone asks, yes I am an expert on many types of military ordinance and the damage they can cause to various types of structures and other armors.