9/11 The Pentagon “Where are the FACTS!

reply to post by MolecularPhD


I know exactly what you mean. I don't know if you're familiar with the 911 Comm. Report, but chapter 9 is where they mentioned the Pentagon if you just flip through the index. It's like this report itself. It seems like there should be something directly in the index that says "events of the pentagon and evidence" or something to that effect. Instead, the supposed info about the pentagon is listed under a chapter called "Herrorism and Horror"?

[edit on 17-5-2010 by curious_soul]

reply to post by curious_soul


Yes I have read through both section several times; no where in that document does it show any scientific findings of anything. Just a ton of statements and conjecture nothing more then that though I'm afraid.

Respectfully

MolecularPHD

Originally posted by MolecularPhD

Non of the above constitutes a threat to National Security

How do you know that for a fact?

If you don't know what's in it, wouldn't it also mean that you aren't able to make that judgement?

Or are you clairvoyant?

reply to post by Joey Canoli


As the information that would be contained in the reports I am asking for would be purely scientific data charts signed by the lab techs and scientists over seeing these studies; how would that constitute a breach of National Security?

There would only be a breach in National Security if in fact the reports showed a direct involvement by our Government; IE a cover up of the physical evidence recovered at the scene. There would be a breach of National Security if the data was analyzed and found to be fraudulent or miss leading in some manner; other then that these reports would have nothing to do with the direct investigation of those involved in the actual events of 9/11 other then to show the physical evidence of the crime commited.

Respectfully

MolecularPHD

P.S. If you had a prior scientific background you would understand the above.

Originally posted by MolecularPhD

As the information that would be contained in the reports I am asking for would be purely scientific data charts signed by the lab techs and scientists over seeing these studies; how would that constitute a breach of National Security?

Answer my question:

If YOU don't know what's in them, how can you be making your argument?

In order to make this argument, one must first know what's in them, and then have the technical knowledge to able to determine whether or not the information contained in them could give clues to exactly what the technical abilities of those forensic labs are.

Do you agree?

reply to post by Joey Canoli


I could name at least a dozen scientists off the top of my head not including myself that could review the scientific data in these reports and could either verify or deny the information contained within. As I currently work with the US Government doing scientific research and development in advanced energy technologies and advanced materials research; I have direct knowledge of the protocols used in these types of studies and the scientific methods used. A simple review of the reports by any qualified scientific body would prove or disprove their findings but, a group of scientists working off of eye witness reports and conjecture of the findings of those documents does not constitute proof of anything; it simply opens the door to wild "Conspiracy Theories" which is what we have now. Aren't you tired of the "Theories" lets put an end to all of this and let the victims rest by putting forth the real reports and findings. Unless of course they show our Government was involved then I could see why everyone on the side of the OS fights so hard to keep them secret. You tell me?

Respectfully

MolecularPHD

reply to post by MolecularPhD


Look up the building performance report instead of the 9/11 Commission Report. The Report wasnt supposed to get into the nitty gritty of the buildings that day, that was for other studies.

reply to post by MolecularPhD


This guy presents a very detailed analysis in comparing the engine parts recovered from the wreckage at the Pentagon with the Rolls-Royce RB211-535 .

www.aerospaceweb.org...

He found the engine parts from the Pentagon to be entirely consistent with the RB211-535 turbofan engine found on the Boeing 757 operated by American Airlines .

I know absolutely nothing about aircraft engines , but his presentation is convincing and I feel it is worth your time to read it .

Hopefully , this will answer some of your questions .


"In summary, we have studied two key pieces of wreckage photographed at the Pentagon shortly after September 11 and found them to be entirely consistent with the Rolls-Royce RB211-535 turbofan engine found on a Boeing 757 operated by American Airlines. The circular engine disk debris is just the right size and shape to match the compressor stages of the RB211, and it also shows evidence of being attached to a triple-shaft turbofan like the RB211. While many have claimed the wreckage instead comes from a JT8D or AE3007H turbofan, we have shown that these engines are too small to match the debris. Furthermore, we have studied what clearly looks like the outer shell of a combustion case and found that its fuel injector nozzle ports match up exactly to those illustrated in Boeing documentation for the RB211-535 engine. There is simply no evidence to suggest these items came from any other engine model than the RB211-535, and the vast majority of these engines are only used on one type of plane--the Boeing 757." (From the above link)

[edit on 17-5-2010 by okbmd]

Originally posted by MolecularPhD

I could name at least a dozen scientists off the top of my head not including myself that could review the scientific data in these reports and could either verify or deny the information contained within.

How could you know that, when you don't know what's in them? Or are you thinking specifically of a certain area that you know guys that have experience in.

As I currently work with the US Government doing scientific research and development in advanced energy technologies and advanced materials research; I have direct knowledge of the protocols used in these types of studies and the scientific methods used.

That's great. Too bad that none of your expertise is necessary, that I can see.

A simple review of the reports by any qualified scientific body would prove or disprove their findings

Again, this ignores the security issue. Anybody that sees them, should be vetted first. You know this.

The irony here, is that once this is done, and this body has passed review, truthers would probably no longer trust them, especially after they discover that court testimony is true. They would then become, in their mind, part of the coverup.

a group of scientists working off of eye witness reports and conjecture of the findings of those documents does not constitute proof of anything

Uh, in case you missed it, your whole argument is that scientific papers should be readily available. The scientists with access to this info have rendered their reports and opinions.

So why are you talking about eyewitness reports and conjecture? This only applies to truthers. They are free to continue as they please.

it simply opens the door to wild "Conspiracy Theories" which is what we have now.

Funny, I just pointed out elsewhere that the moon hoaxers ignore all scientific facts. It applies to truthers too.

Aren't you tired of the "Theories"

No, I find the irrationality of truthers quite entertaining.

lets put an end to all of this and let the victims rest by putting forth the real reports and findings.

On the flip side, I say let's put an end to the wild speculation and delusional thinking from truthers until they have some concrete evidence. For it is they who are causing all the problems.

Unless of course they show our Government was involved then I could see why everyone on the side of the OS fights so hard to keep them secret. You tell me?

Sure.

Truthers believe whatever supports their delusions. It's as simple as that.

Originally posted by MolecularPhD
As the information that would be contained in the reports I am asking for would be purely scientific data charts signed by the lab techs and scientists over seeing these studies; how would that constitute a breach of National Security?

What I'd like to know is, what is your rationale for wanting to analyze this material to begin with? You're not likewise demanding that Dr. Robert Ballard provide you with stress analysis and wreckage disbursement patterns to prove the Titanic really was sunk by an iceberg, so it's clear that you have an emotional attachment to it that's way beyond simple mild curiosity. Something has put the idea into your mind that said evidence is suspicious and needs to be analyzed.

I just hope that it's for a better reason than simply becuase of some stupid paranoid thing you read on some damned fool conspiracy web site.

reply to post by GoodOlDave


No Dave it is not because of the ramblings of some "Truther Website"; if you had read all of my posts you would know that. I am a consultant for RR from time to time; during those visits with RR Labs I became friends with one of the designers of the RB-211; I showed my friend the pictures taken at the crash site; and after he reviewed the photos I showed him, it was he who said "This is not part of my engine" that was my wake up call you could call it. According to my friend at RR the diameter and design of the slip sleeve (center of the hub) that goes over the high pressure pipe is not his design; the hub in question is supposed to be from a 5 series RB-211 which is the Engine he was a key part in designing for RR. And yes I have a personal dog in this fight; as I lost two close friends that were on duty in the Pentagon that day.

As for the other ATS member posting above; I have direct ties to many Aviation Engineers that have direct ties to the design and construction of the Engine in question; if anyone would know if this was a RB-211 they would as they were the ones who designed it for RR. I also have ties to scientific experts in the field of metallurgy; material integrity specialists, and advanced material engineers all of which either work for NASA or are prior engineers for NASA that would be over qualified to review the scientific data taken from the recovery site; as I have shown in links in other posts it is SOP for the FBI lab to release their scientific findings for peer review and in non of these cases is the scientific data deemed a threat to National Security; and yes there are many open and pending cases they list for review.

I am still unclear as to the purpose behind why you do not want this data to be reviewed; unless you had concerns that would show that the data that has been released to the public were fraudulent. Sense I have posted this thread I have been personally attacked by posters that are on the side of the OS; and in no posting have I personally attacked any of you. I have not tried to label any of you in anyway; and have asked many questions that are still unanswered. I am not a "Truther" as you keep trying to label me as some "Conspiracy Theorist" I am a scientist and as such I want to see the facts; not from an outside party or what that outside party claims to be fact; I want to see the physical reports, chain of custody reports, and the chain of evidence reports these would put to rest any and all claims to a "Conspiracy Theory"; this would bring closer in my eyes to this entire horrible event; unless these reports showed direct involvement or evidence tampering in which case as American's I would think you would want the facts to come out.

I wish I had the "FAITH" to believe without seeing the actual proof but, unfortunately as I scientist I do not have that luxury.

Respectfully

MolecularPHD

Originally posted by MolecularPhD

No Dave it is not because of the ramblings of some "Truther Website"; if you had read all of my posts you would know that. I am a consultant for RR from time to time; during those visits with RR Labs I became friends with one of the designers of the RB-211; I showed my friend the pictures taken at the crash site; and after he reviewed the photos I showed him, it was he who said "This is not part of my engine" that was my wake up call you could call it. According to my friend at RR the diameter and design of the slip sleeve (center of the hub) that goes over the high pressure pipe is not his design; the hub in question is supposed to be from a 5 series RB-211 which is the Engine he was a key part in designing for RR.

If this is the case, then it becomes his responsibility to show what the correct component should look like, as again, I am looking at the photos of the wreckage as released by the photographers who were there, and the schematics of the engine in question as released by Rolls Royce, and they look identical to me.

The simplest solution is almost certainly the correct solution, and barring any further information from your friend that can refute what photographers and Rolls Royce itself is presenting, the simplest solution is that your friend is mistaken.

I am still unclear as to the purpose behind why you do not want this data to be reviewed; unless you had concerns that would show that the data that has been released to the public were fraudulent. Sense I have posted this thread I have been personally attacked by posters that are on the side of the OS; and in no posting have I personally attacked any of you.

This is becuase you are following in the footsteps of many others in the supposed truther movement who have blatantly dishonest agendas, and who do insult others that don't goose step to their own favored conspiracy dogma. 99.99 percent of the people demanding investigation of the Pentagon attack are people who insist that it was a coverup of some sinister conspiracy to take over the world that only a lunatic could come up with, so if you are goign to quack like a duck, you should not wonder that you're goign to be shot at by the duck hunters.

It is a given that the feds aren't goign to hand out the wreckage recovered at the Pentagon site to just anybody, since almost all peopel requesting review are the same conspiracy people with absolutely zero expertise to examine it. If you genuinely want an inquiry then a) you need to separate yourself from the crackpots who think the Pentagon was hit by a cruise missile, Predator drone, UFO, or whatever, and organize yourselves appropriately, and b) request it through proper channels. A request from two or three congressmen and senators who are on your side will open doors otherwise closed to you.

My concern definitely is not over having more investigations. Have as many investigations as you'd like. My concern is that you're not going to accept the findings of any further investigations if they don't come out the way you want them to, meaning that this whole bit over further investigations is nothing but a political ploy and a grandiose waste of everyone's time.

I wish I had the "FAITH" to believe without seeing the actual proof but, unfortunately as I scientist I do not have that luxury.

Like you, I wish that you could give me more of a worthwhile reason to dismiss all the eyewitness accounts of the people who were there at the time and who specifically say that it was a large passenger jet with AA markings other than unsubstanciated paranoid claims they're "all gov't disinformation agents" but I have to remain intellectually honest.

reply to post by MolecularPhD

I was looking over some pictures of the crash site at the Pentagon on my laptop (about 4 years ago) because, Jim Lawrence walked by the office I was working out of, and the pictures were suppose to be of the RB-211 which he was crucial in its core design; I said to Jim “hey looks like your hub designed stayed intact; Jim took one look at the photo and said “That is not my engine!”; well folks that was it for me.

Its funny, you are trying so hard to pass yourself off as this neutral, disinterested, third party science expert, however, you never real told us why you just happened to be looking at crash site photos of the Pentagon and Flight 77 and then just happened to have the designer of the plane part you were looking walk by your door and affirm that the part in question was not consistent with the plane involved in Flight 77. Then you, with this earth shattering information decide to go to - The Washington Post? No. The New York Times? No. The FBI? No. The DOJ? No. No, you decided to travel this blockbuster to a forum on a conspiracy website.

Now thats funny.

Originally posted by MolecularPhD
There would only be a breach in National Security if in fact the reports showed a direct involvement by our Government; IE a cover up of the physical evidence recovered at the scene.

Sigh. It's funny but also quite sad how many truthers think they're so important that the big bad government should cater to their whims. Nothing, I repeat nothing will ever satisfy them since they KNOW "the truth" already. What a joke.

Now, why in the world would you ask for reports from the very same people who are supposed to be in on the cover-up? Since you don't believe the evidence already and seem to be convinced the hub cannot be part of the engine, what makes you think they couldn't or wouldn't fake some reports?

Let's get to the truth here, you know as well as everyone else that no matter what the reports were to say, if it didn't agree with some conspiracy the government must be lying. This is exactly why we say you guys are stuck in an lonely, endless spiral.

P.S. If you had a prior scientific background you would understand the above.

P.S. Drop the pretentious attitude. If you had a prior background in common sense you would understand the above.

Originally posted by MolecularPhD
reply to post by Blue_Jay33

 

I have no idea, as I have not seen any real scientific evidence that proves anything. I believe the American People deserve to know the truth! Don't You?

MolecularPHD

[edit on 12-5-2010 by MolecularPhD]

Alas there is no way that we can know the truth without being there. Being both at the pentagon when the planes hit and being inside of the plane before it hit.

reply to post by MolecularPhD


I have posted a link in two different threads now that pretty much proves that the engine parts recovered at the Pentagon were entirely consistent with the RB211-535 ., the engine from Flight 77 .

Twice , you have ignored the link and refused to address it . Do you have a legitimate reason for this ?

Here is the link , for the THIRD time :www.aerospaceweb.org...

Please give an explanation as to why you refuse to comment on the report found in this link .

Or , please explain why you feel the author of this report is wrong ., afterall , he is an Aerospace Engineer . His credentials and accomplishments are more than impressive , and I believe his analysis merits your response , since it addresses the engine in question .

If you refuse to address this , please explain why .

Originally posted by MolecularPhD
reply to post by Joey Canoli

 

As the information that would be contained in the reports I am asking for would be purely scientific data charts signed by the lab techs and scientists over seeing these studies; how would that constitute a breach of National Security?

It could constitute a breach of National Security under the correct conditions. I'm not a national security expert. I think I remember reading the methods used to investigate things (large scale cyber crimes for example) were kept under lock and key so that hackers could not learn them in and out and find ways to circumvent them.

Valid point: Investigating a plane crash theory is different than investigating hacker theory. If I was running this country and I read the islamic extremists websites praising the fort hood shooter and 9/11 WTC attacks and calling for more faithful muslims to heed the call of allah I would not want to put the methods I use to investigate terrorist attacks on www.wtc.net just to be copied and pasted onto islamextreemist.net just so that people who think that crashing planes into american buildings (or putting bombs in american buildings) is a great idea won't figure out a better way to do it.

This is laughable, they know the damn facts...Can't wait until the REAL militia gives them more than they can handle.


NOT MAKING ANY THREATS I KNOW THIS IS BEING WATCHED CLOSELY AND I WANT TO MAKE THAT CLEAR

[edit on 18-5-2010 by NWOWILLFALL]

Hey Phd

The attack party has arrived....I told you you were on a winner!!

Yes sireeee, they sure dont like your train of thought .....

reply to post by MolecularPhD


The central plank of your argument seems to be your conversation with Jim Lawrence in Houston and this has been met with well deserved incredulity.

Is it not a remarkable coincidence that a designer of the RB 211 should be passing your office just as you were perusing Pentagon wreckage pics ? Especially as the RB 211 was originally designed in Barnoldswick UK in the 1960's so Jim was a long way from home and pretty long in the tooth presumably. How familiar was he with subsequent modifications such as the RB 211-535 from the mid seventies and how do you know ?

You paint Jim as singularly lacking in curiosity. He must have known that Boeing 757's and 767's were the 9/11 planes and that RB 211 engines were probably involved but he had apparently never bothered to take a look at any engine wreckage himself. He gives you a diameter guestimate off the top of his head, denies it is part of a RB211-535 engine and goes on his way. Did he never think to pursue this remarkable find ? part of the crime of the century. Try and establish measurements more accurately, consult colleagues like RB 211 Chief Designer John Coplin ?

Did it never occur to either of you to report this remarkable find to the FBI or FAA ?

Is there anything further you can give to substantiate the story ?

I too would like to read your comments on this article :-

www.aerospaceweb.org...

Which okbmd keeps referring you to.