the hole in the pentagon..is the big hole in the 911 story

It's funny how watching a few youtube videos and copy/pasting makes people here an expert on plane damage against hardened structures. I remember watching one of the 9/11 shows, and one guy in particular who was on site the day this occurred, and worked there for weeks following, solely to come up with the exact chain of events.

He was an expert who did this exact sort of thing. He had software that could detail the structure, plane, and exactly how everything happened - for example, the outer hole, the much smaller inner hole, etc. He himself had no doubt that this plane collided with the Pentagon, and was disgusted personally, with those who claim otherwise, with next to no actual expert knowledge, based on conspiracy-babble.

Just because YOU can't understand how this could have occurred, doesn't mean it didn't happen. I venture a guess that none of you are experts - other than expert at swallowing all youtube and conspiracy theories, hook line and sinker.

Without detailed analysis, you can't possibly know what the crashing of this jumbo jet into the hardened structure like the Pentagon would have done. Experts HAVE determined that this actually happened as it was portrayed.

reply to post by SkepticAndBeliever


I didn't ask for some morons animation, I want to see even one of the several videos they have.

You are so full of it. Let's see one of these videos you keep screaming about, and calling people liars.

Just one. And some kids animation doesn't count.

"Spreading disinformation" HAHAHA! There is no video of the plane hitting the pentagon available to the public. PERIOD. Now scram.

Originally posted by Tephra
reply to post by SkepticAndBeliever

 

I didn't ask for some morons animation, I want to see even one of the several videos they have.

You are so full of it. Let's see one of these videos you keep screaming about, and calling people liars.

Just one. And some kids animation doesn't count.

He made only one animation from one of the videos, the video I posted clearly shows 3 different videos the pentagon being hit with NO animation. Again. Lies. You never even watched the video. STOP SPREADING DISINFORMATION!

reply to post by blackrain17


Planes head toward the Pentagon everyday. It lies in the approach/departure of Reagan National. There would be little to no reaction time. As for Mr. Mineta's testimony, it was shown by several other sources, that he was wrong with his timeline.

Originally posted by fleabit
It's funny how watching a few youtube videos and copy/pasting makes people here an expert.

I never said I was an expert, I listen to the experts, and the scientific community rejects conspiracy theory claims made by pseudoscience loons of the "truth" movement.Period.

" The mainstream scientific community does not support the controlled demolition hypothesis and U.S. officials, mainstream journalists, and mainstream researchers have concluded that only al-Qaeda was involved in the attacks."

reply to post by SkepticAndBeliever


You've got to be trolling, the video you posted is the same NON-Footage we've had for years. It's not 3 videos, it's one 3 second clip, being played over and over again. It doesn't show anything, and even the video you posted didn't claim it was anything other than similar.

The government confiscated several videos and multiple vantage points, and chose to provide us a horrible quality, horrible angle, micro clip showing absolutely nothing of value.

Apparently you just can't accept that they are hiding the truth, plain and simple.

Originally posted by Tephra
reply to post by SkepticAndBeliever

 

You've got to be trolling, the video you posted is the same NON-Footage we've had for years. It's not 3 videos, it's one 3 second clip, being played over and over again. It doesn't show anything, and even the video you posted didn't claim it was anything other than similar.

The government confiscated several videos and multiple vantage points, and chose to provide us a horrible quality, horrible angle, micro clip showing absolutely nothing of value.

Apparently you just can't accept that they are hiding the truth, plain and simple.

I was mistaken , there weren't 3 videos of the pentagon being hit on that video only 2.

First video of pentagon being hit at 0:11 seconds into it
Completely different shot of pentagon being hit at 0:50 seconds into the video


But to say they haven't released anything is a lie...but please keep believing in debunked conspiracy theories and spreading misinformation though.

reply to post by SkepticAndBeliever


Please refrain from telling people that they "lie". Your videos do not "prove" anything. Particularly that the object was in fact a B757. It is interesting that the video frames do not show any of the aircraft parts ejected from the impact found on the Pentagon grounds afterwards. Use empirical evidence for your arguments, not subjective media.

Originally posted by SkepticAndBeliever A few months ago me and my friend got in trouble with the cops, It was a surprise because the cop couldn't have known my name and my friend got let go RIGHT AWAY but I was the one who got in trouble. Now, a conspiracy theorist would assume my buddy snitched on me, a person who looks at evidence would know that the cop knew my name because of my licence plate number and my buddy got let out because he had a clean record and I had a prior. Basically I'm trying to break people from the "common sense" thinking , because it's only common sense to assume I got snitched on but it was not true. People need to look at hard facts not flimsy A to B connections.

UMMMM.
Common sense would tell you that if a cop pulled you over, he already knows the name of the owner of the car he pulled over. You see....they run a license plate check before even getting out of the vehicle. Common sense would tell you this.
It is apparent that you have broken yourself from common sense thinking...and that is too bad.
Without common sense....most people wont go very far in life.

Originally posted by SkepticAndBeliever



All you have are theories based on "motive" and "coincidence" alone, I'm here to debate hard facts and nothing else. So quit spreading disinformation and lying when the proof is undeniable. Here is photographic proof that Flight 77 hit the building, eye witness accounts of Flight 77 hiting the pentagon, along with the bodies of the fallen (RIP) . You should be ashamed, I'm sure their families would be.

you know this image you posted shows correlations between wreckage and a Global hawk.. right? I thought you said the Global Hawk nonesense was debunked? then why you using this image?> you obviously dont care about this debate, and you don't pay attention to what you even say. You dont have an opinion.. you have a job.


This member has been debunked.. nothing more to see here..

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by blackrain17

 

Planes head toward the Pentagon everyday. It lies in the approach/departure of Reagan National. There would be little to no reaction time. As for Mr. Mineta's testimony, it was shown by several other sources, that he was wrong with his timeline.

He must have been wrong with his timeline. Thats the only viable excuse you debunkers have. It couldnt be that Cheney FLAT OUT LIED...could it?

reply to post by SkepticAndBeliever


pseudo science loon?

www.abovetopsecret.com... Real pilots are not lunatics compared to you, like you stated, and tbh trying to use your DC10 simulation to prove me wrong was a mistake and clearly shows the level of lunacy you at.

www.abovetopsecret.com...
Secondly, heres the only real footage that was proven doctored(CGI).

Originally posted by Myendica

Originally posted by SkepticAndBeliever



All you have are theories based on "motive" and "coincidence" alone, I'm here to debate hard facts and nothing else. So quit spreading disinformation and lying when the proof is undeniable. Here is photographic proof that Flight 77 hit the building, eye witness accounts of Flight 77 hiting the pentagon, along with the bodies of the fallen (RIP) . You should be ashamed, I'm sure their families would be.

you know this image you posted shows correlations between wreckage and a Global hawk.. right? I thought you said the Global Hawk nonesense was debunked? then why you using this image?> you obviously dont care about this debate, and you don't pay attention to what you even say. You dont have an opinion.. you have a job.


This member has been debunked.. nothing more to see here..

Lies. Nothing indicates a Black Hawk that's your wacko opinion, that has been debunked. Keep trying, mayeb someone might buy your disinformation.

reply to post by userid1


True, its most pronounced, but that doesnt mean it doesnt exist in larger aircraft. It also says its linked to things like wing surface area, wingspan, etc and these planes are HUGE. It also mentions the effect comes into play at 1 to 1.5 times the wingspan of the craft. These craft wingspans are 124 ft 10 in... and this plane crashed into the first and second floor. Additionally I dont think Boeing is willing to test the ground effect in one of its jets, let alone a test pilot.

While I agree the ground effect is severely diminished, I would have to think that there is still some effect. Actually maybe the ground effect confirms that it was a plane. The pilot would have been aiming at the lawn, and ground effect forced it to stay aloft, albiet very low

Originally posted by eagleeye2
reply to post by SkepticAndBeliever

 

pseudo science loon?

www.abovetopsecret.com... Real pilots are not lunatics compared to you, like you stated, and tbh trying to use your DC10 simulation to prove me wrong was a mistake and clearly shows the level of lunacy you at.

"Who can and can not do it on simulations does not alter the fact people saw and video captured planes hitting the towers. That ends the debate on if it could be done." - Pretty simple


Here's a pilot who says it can in fact be done, I can cite many other pilots stating it wasn't impossible at all.

911myths.com...

reply to post by DIDtm

Well I could have added that the facts also show that truthers are completely off the mark about the meaning behind his testimony. But then, anyone interested in the actual truth, already know that.

reply to post by SkepticAndBeliever


I actually wasn't aware that ground effect had already been considered. Also, look to my previous post, at the end I speculated that ground effect might have allowed for the craft to come in so low while not scuffing the lawn. The pilot may have aimed at the lawn and ground effect caused it to stay aloft mere feet above the ground? Also Im not sure exactly if they were saying ground effect proved it was a plane, or if ground effect had nothing to do with this situation from your post.

I hope I wasnt coming across as a 'know it all', merely playing devils advocate.

ETA: Also, no I dont have any doubts that it was a plane that hit the pentagon.My doubts lie in who was behind the whole ordeal, but thats off topic. That missile theory was so 2001,

Originally posted by SkepticAndBeliever

Originally posted by Myendica

Originally posted by SkepticAndBeliever



All you have are theories based on "motive" and "coincidence" alone, I'm here to debate hard facts and nothing else. So quit spreading disinformation and lying when the proof is undeniable. Here is photographic proof that Flight 77 hit the building, eye witness accounts of Flight 77 hiting the pentagon, along with the bodies of the fallen (RIP) . You should be ashamed, I'm sure their families would be.

you know this image you posted shows correlations between wreckage and a Global hawk.. right? I thought you said the Global Hawk nonesense was debunked? then why you using this image?> you obviously dont care about this debate, and you don't pay attention to what you even say. You dont have an opinion.. you have a job.


This member has been debunked.. nothing more to see here..

Lies. Nothing indicates a Black Hawk that's your wacko opinion, that has been debunked. Keep trying, mayeb someone might buy your disinformation.

edit on 19-6-2011 by SkepticAndBeliever because: (no reason given)

cough.. its in your image you provided.. cough... the one with the blue background.. says northrop... the grey thing with 1 engine, and it says U.S. Air Force it looks like.. with arrows pointing to wreckage in pentagon images.. next to it.. like.. 3rd image down on the right side... yeah...


you are just trolling and having fun... ( its fact.. cause you don't even read or look at the evidence you yourself provide) we get it.. not many people take 9/11 seriously. Perhaps you should ask someone to help you get over your grief..

its not your fault.,

reply to post by SkepticAndBeliever


"Who can and can not do it on simulations does not alter the fact people saw and video captured planes hitting the towers. That ends the debate on if it could be done. - Pretty simple "

Is this your " argument" ? lol

you cannot debate this fact because you are way too weak. That.. that is pretty simple.