9/11 - some scientific stuff to think about it

    Quote from mikezilla

    he didn't land it

    Exactly. It's preposterous to think that they'd need any special knowledge beyond what they already had (i.e. enough to keep the thing in the air) to point the nose down and fly into a building.

    Quote from Minotauro

    I dont get it, what does that picture say? Did you see the pictures of streetlights that the plane broke while flying over? If it wasnt a plane, what was it? A 100ft thick missile? And the ppl driving on the freeway saw the plane as well, and all the ppl inside the plane went missing so where are they? Where did the plane go if it didnt hit the Pentagon? Where are the passengers? What did the airtraffic controllers see on their radars? What broke the streetlamps, and how did the plane pieces get inside the Pentagon? 2 planes were caught on camera crashing into buildings,1 hit a field, guess what crashed into the Pentagon.

    1) the tree is intact

    2) there are intact windows on the left and on the right

    3) Where's the tail ?

    Quote from RD

    The "dumb" terrorists had the same flighttraining as other "dumb" pilots who are now actually flying planes.

    No. As far as I know they had never flought real planes before, just simulators. The WTC is easy to hit but the pentagon ? To hit such a short building you need at least landing experience, and if I recall the guy from the flight school said that they never really cared about taking off and landing while training. All they wanted to know was how to keep the plane flying.

    the tree, is really far away, adjacent to the highway:

    http://www.spaceimaging.com/gallery/9-1 ... _12_01.jpg

    the plane, came into the building from a 45 degree angle

    http://media.popularmechanics.com/image ... 001-lg.jpg

    something like the picture here, you can see the trees off to the left

    [Blocked Image: http://911review.com/attack/pentagon/imgs/pentagon_navy_command.gif]

    [Blocked Image: http://911review.com/errors/pentagon/imgs/impact757.gif]

    the tail is made of aluminum. i went camping once and made a kind of big fire, we threw some cans in and they melted immediately. Now imagine a plane flying at 400mph, filled with fuel, crashing into a hard building.

    http://www.geoffmetcalf.com/pentagon/images/8.jpg heres a good picture of the crash area

    stuff about the hole in the pentagon

    http://911review.com/attack/pentagon/impact.html

    oh, and you should read this:

    http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread79655/pg1

    READ HERE:

    9/11 debunking the myths:

    http://www.popularmechanics.com/science ... 27842.html

    flight 93 snippet:

    FLIGHT 93

    Cockpit recordings indicate the passengers on United Airlines Flight 93 teamed up to attack their hijackers, forcing down the plane near Shanksville, in southwestern Pennsylvania. But conspiracy theorists assert Flight 93 was destroyed by a heat-seeking missile from an F-16 or a mysterious white plane. Some theorists add far-fetched elaborations: No terrorists were aboard, or the passengers were drugged. The wildest is the "bumble planes" theory, which holds that passengers from Flights 11, 175 and 77 were loaded onto Flight 93 so the U.S. government could kill them.

    The White Jet

    CLAIM: At least six eyewitnesses say they saw a small white jet flying low over the crash area almost immediately after Flight 93 went down. BlogD.com theorizes that the aircraft was downed by "either a missile fired from an Air Force jet, or via an electronic assault made by a U.S. Customs airplane reported to have been seen near the site minutes after Flight 93 crashed." WorldNetDaily.com weighs in: "Witnesses to this low-flying jet ... told their story to journalists. Shortly thereafter, the FBI began to attack the witnesses with perhaps the most inane disinformation ever--alleging the witnesses actually observed a private jet at 34,000 ft. The FBI says the jet was asked to come down to 5000 ft. and try to find the crash site. This would require about 20 minutes to descend."

    FACT: There was such a jet in the vicinity--a Dassault Falcon 20 business jet owned by the VF Corp. of Greensboro, N.C., an apparel company that markets Wrangler jeans and other brands. The VF plane was flying into Johnstown-Cambria airport, 20 miles north of Shanksville. According to David Newell, VF's director of aviation and travel, the FAA's Cleveland Center contacted copilot Yates Gladwell when the Falcon was at an altitude "in the neighborhood of 3000 to 4000 ft."--not 34,000 ft. "They were in a descent already going into Johnstown," Newell adds. "The FAA asked them to investigate and they did. They got down within 1500 ft. of the ground when they circled. They saw a hole in the ground with smoke coming out of it. They pinpointed the location and then continued on." Reached by PM, Gladwell confirmed this account but, concerned about ongoing harassment by conspiracy theorists, asked not to be quoted directly.

    Roving Engine

    CLAIM: One of Flight 93's engines was found "at a considerable distance from the crash site," according to Lyle Szupinka, a state police officer on the scene who was quoted in the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review. Offering no evidence, a posting on Rense.com claimed: "The main body of the engine ... was found miles away from the main wreckage site with damage comparable to that which a heat-seeking missile would do to an airliner."

    FACT: Experts on the scene tell PM that a fan from one of the engines was recovered in a catchment basin, downhill from the crash site. Jeff Reinbold, the National Park Service representative responsible for the Flight 93 National Memorial, confirms the direction and distance from the crash site to the basin: just over 300 yards south, which means the fan landed in the direction the jet was traveling. "It's not unusual for an engine to move or tumble across the ground," says Michael K. Hynes, an airline accident expert who investigated the crash of TWA Flight 800 out of New York City in 1996. "When you have very high velocities, 500 mph or more," Hynes says, "you are talking about 700 to 800 ft. per second. For something to hit the ground with that kind of energy, it would only take a few seconds to bounce up and travel 300 yards." Numerous crash analysts contacted by PM concur.

    Indian Lake

    CLAIM: "Residents and workers at businesses outside Shanksville, Somerset County, reported discovering clothing, books, papers and what appeared to be human remains," states a Pittsburgh Post-Gazette article dated Sept. 13, 2001. "Others reported what appeared to be crash debris floating in Indian Lake, nearly 6 miles from the immediate crash scene." Commenting on reports that Indian Lake residents collected debris, Think AndAsk.com speculates: "On Sept. 10, 2001, a strong cold front pushed through the area, and behind it--winds blew northerly. Since Flight 93 crashed west-southwest of Indian Lake, it was impossible for debris to fly perpendicular to wind direction. ... The FBI lied." And the significance of widespread debris? Theorists claim the plane was breaking up before it crashed. TheForbiddenKnowledge.com states bluntly: "Without a doubt, Flight 93 was shot down."

    FACT: Wallace Miller, Somerset County coroner, tells PM no body parts were found in Indian Lake. Human remains were confined to a 70-acre area directly surrounding the crash site. Paper and tiny scraps of sheetmetal, however, did land in the lake. "Very light debris will fly into the air, because of the concussion," says former National Transportation Safety Board investigator Matthew McCormick. Indian Lake is less than 1.5 miles southeast of the impact crater--not 6 miles--easily within range of debris blasted skyward by the heat of the explosion from the crash. And the wind that day was northwesterly, at 9 to 12 mph, which means it was blowing from the northwest--toward Indian Lake.


    [Blocked Image: http://img85.imageshack.us/img85/1922/f939ln.th.jpg]

    Map by International Mapping


    F-16 Pilot

    CLAIM: In February 2004, retired Army Col. Donn de Grand-Pre said on "The Alex Jones Show," a radio talk show broadcast on 42 stations: "It [Flight 93] was taken out by the North Dakota Air Guard. I know the pilot who fired those two missiles to take down 93." LetsRoll911.org, citing de Grand-Pre, identifies the pilot: "Major Rick Gibney fired two Sidewinder missiles at the aircraft and destroyed it in midflight at precisely 0958."

    FACT: Saying he was reluctant to fuel debate by responding to unsubstantiated charges, Gibney (a lieutenant colonel, not a major) declined to comment. According to Air National Guard spokesman Master Sgt. David Somdahl, Gibney flew an F-16 that morning--but nowhere near Shanksville. He took off from Fargo, N.D., and flew to Bozeman, Mont., to pick up Ed Jacoby Jr., the director of the New York State Emergency Management Office. Gibney then flew Jacoby from Montana to Albany, N.Y., so Jacoby could coordinate 17,000 rescue workers engaged in the state's response to 9/11. Jacoby confirms the day's events. "I was in Big Sky for an emergency managers meeting. Someone called to say an F-16 was landing in Bozeman. From there we flew to Albany." Jacoby is outraged by the claim that Gibney shot down Flight 93. "I summarily dismiss that because Lt. Col. Gibney was with me at that time. It disgusts me to see this because the public is being misled. More than anything else it disgusts me because it brings up fears. It brings up hopes--it brings up all sorts of feelings, not only to the victims' families but to all the individuals throughout the country, and the world for that matter. I get angry at the misinformation out there."

    I am not fucking retarded, you are just ignorant and need read more books and all have watched to many films on google that s imaginary fake and including stupid content, half photoshopped and half moviemaker false.

    It's not my fault all blame America, it doesn't matter what you think but the government is soo misty and misleading for the public.

    Yeah say what you say but you are just acting like a 12 years old kid off school that is just picking fights and produce hate.

    Stop reacting like 12 year old

    Oh if you are so vulnerable go hate me then I wont give a fuck.

    I'm through of this shit and im through with this. This is unbeliavable, this is fucking bullshit to me.. What the fuck is this?

    Edit: I'm not a racist or anything and i respect America but I don't understand the government.

    I'm more or less speaking about your complete ignorance of proper grammar. Crap man, I'm not great at speaking english or putting my thoughts together in a coherent manner, but you've broken all english laws put forth.

    Awesome post klein~

    Quote from Bic-B@ll

    the tail is made of aluminum. i went camping once and made a kind of big fire, we threw some cans in and they melted immediately. Now imagine a plane flying at 400mph, filled with fuel, crashing into a hard building.

    haha man, please, there's HUGE difference between a soda can and an airplane's tail. We have already seen loads of plane accidents and the tail is always there.

    Quote from Mikezilla

    he didn't land it

    uh. From the image it seems that it hit the first floor, how can a plane hit the first floor of a 4-story building without touching the ground ? I still can't believe that unexperienced pilots performed such a hard trick. You have to know exactly the time to start going down, to reduce speed etc...

    And what about the FBI retrieving tapes showing the "alleged" plane impact ? Why would they do it if they have nothing to hide. And do you really think that there was only one camera filming the entire pentagon ? That shit is like a fortress there must be cameras on every spot of the building.

    And how could such a "small" fire melt the entire plane down ?

    Besides that all, if I were a terrorist I would have hit the most important area of the building (the donald rummsfeld cabinet) and not the nearly reinforced and less important one. If you were a terrorist and had to plan such a big attack you would know things like that.

    PS: Independently from having seen that documentary these are just points that I have noticed by myself, after reading news and viewing images of the impact.

    we have?

    it did touch the ground, maybe if you looked at this:

    http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread79655/pg1

    you would see that the plane hit phone poles, took out a fence, hit a generator, DID hit the ground, and hit BETWEEN the first and second floors

    http://www.geoffmetcalf.com/pentagon/images/1.jpg

    http://69.57.144.30/ats/pentagon757/gen ... fence1.jpg

    http://69.57.144.30/ats/pentagon757/gen ... -small.jpg

    "Even though the two airplanes flown into the World Trade Center towers were travelling faster at the time of impact than the Pentagon plane was (400 MPH vs. 350 MPH), hit aluminum-and-glass buildings rather than reinforced concrete walls, and didn't dissipate much of their energy striking the ground first (as the Pentagon plane did), they still barely penetrated all the way through the WTC towers."

    "As eyewitnesses described and photographs demonstrate, the hijacked airliner dived so low as it approached the Pentagon that it actually hit the ground first, thereby dissipating much of the energy that might otherwise have caused more extensive damage to the building; nonetheless, as described by The New York Times, the plane still hit not "just the ground floor" but between the first and second floors:"

    "The Boeing 757 crashed into the outer edge of the building between the first and second floors, "at full power," Mr. Rumsfeld said. It penetrated three of the five concentric rings of the building."

    http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pentagon.htm

    about the debris:

    http://911review.com/errors/pentagon/nodebris.html

    http://911review.com/errors/pentagon/crashdebris.html

    Quote from Minotauro

    uh. From the image it seems that it hit the first floor, how can a plane hit the first floor of a 4-story building without touching the ground ? I still can't believe that unexperienced pilots performed such a hard trick. You have to know exactly the time to start going down, to reduce speed etc...

    The Pentagon is humongous. All they had to do was fly the plane in it somewhere. If they hit another spot you'd probably have said it is very hard to hit it exactly there, but the truth is it is almost impossible to miss something that big, you always hit it somewhere. Just like someone can fire a gun and hit a brick in the pyramids from 10miles away, it doesnt make him a sharpshooter. Well it does if he can hit it twice.

    Quote

    Besides that all, if I were a terrorist I would have hit the most important area of the building (the donald rummsfeld cabinet) and not the nearly reinforced and less important one. If you were a terrorist and had to plan such a big attack you would know things like that.

    Maybe they werent such good pilots :roll: Why would they have to hit Rummsfeld anyway? You probably only ever heard of Rummsfeld AFTER 911.

    In Iraq there are hundreds of terrorists, but none of them target Rummsfelds car when hes on visit. Maybe they are missiles too? Such "big" attacks they must know exactly where and when Rummsfeld is in Iraq?

    Quote

    Just like someone can fire a gun and hit a brick in the pyramids from 10miles away, it doesnt make him a sharpshooter.

    Thats actually a lot harder than it sounds, especially at 10 miles away.

    This thread reminds me of a conspiracy theory programme I saw on 9/11. Lots of people speak outrageous claims about 9/11 for an hour, about how there were explosions inside, skyscrapers aren’t built with the idea of them ever collapsing, there’s not enough debris (mainly about the pentagon), to the point where you actually start believing some of it.

    Then they bring in scientists, engineers and professors of whatever for the last half hour who say "well, actually, that's all bullshit." To which the conspiracy theorists retort "well, you can prove anything with facts."

    Quote from RD

    The Pentagon is humongous. All they had to do was fly the plane in it somewhere. If they hit another spot you'd probably have said it is very hard to hit it exactly there, but the truth is it is almost impossible to miss something that big, you always hit it somewhere. Just like someone can fire a gun and hit a brick in the pyramids from 10miles away, it doesnt make him a sharpshooter. Well it does if he can hit it twice.

    Yeah I agree. hitting something as big as the WTC is easy but you will have to agree with me that hitting a 4-story building with a highway next to it must be pretty hard

    Quote

    Besides that all, if I were a terrorist I would have hit the most important area of the building (the donald rummsfeld cabinet) and not the nearly reinforced and less important one. If you were a terrorist and had to plan such a big attack you would know things like that.

    Maybe they werent such good pilots :roll: Why would they have to hit Rummsfeld anyway? You probably only ever heard of Rummsfeld AFTER 911.

    In Iraq there are hundreds of terrorists, but none of them target Rummsfelds car when hes on visit. Maybe they are missiles too? Such "big" attacks they must know exactly where and when Rummsfeld is in Iraq?

    Yeah I agree, I had never heard of Donald before 911 but the terrorists certainly did. When planning such attacks you will try to cause just as much harm as you can... If I were a terrorist I wouldn't hit the opposite (and just reinforced area) of Donald's office. Besides that all, the flight school owners said that the alleged terrorists were mediocre pilots.

    Quote from Minotauro

    The Pentagon is humongous. All they had to do was fly the plane in it somewhere. If they hit another spot you'd probably have said it is very hard to hit it exactly there, but the truth is it is almost impossible to miss something that big, you always hit it somewhere. Just like someone can fire a gun and hit a brick in the pyramids from 10miles away, it doesnt make him a sharpshooter. Well it does if he can hit it twice.

    Yeah I agree. hitting something as big as the WTC is easy but you will have to agree with me that hitting a 4-story building with a highway next to it must be pretty hard

    .

    [Blocked Image: http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/images/flight77/claim/purdue_sim.jpg]

    what does the highway have to do with anything? if you look at the flight path it follows the highway and goes right into the building, the only obsticales were light poles, which the plane did hit. fly low in a straight path and drop down until you tap the ground, bounce up and hit into the building.

    Quote from Minotauro

    Yeah I agree. hitting something as big as the WTC is easy but you will have to agree with me that hitting a 4-story building with a highway next to it must be pretty hard

    If you aim too low, you bounce off the floor into the side of the Pentagon, if you aim to high you enter the center of the Pentagon from above. How can you miss?

    Quote

    Yeah I agree, I had never heard of Donald before 911 but the terrorists certainly did. When planning such attacks you will try to cause just as much harm as you can... If I were a terrorist I wouldn't hit the opposite (and just reinforced area) of Donald's office. Besides that all, the flight school owners said that the alleged terrorists were mediocre pilots.

    They switched off autopilot, the transponder, and aimed the nose.

Participate now!

Don’t have an account yet? Register yourself now and be a part of our community!

Register Yourself Login