|
|
|
|
|
|
| 9/11: The Pantagon... [message #113095] |
Sat, 04 September 2004 20:43   |
 |
bigejoe14
Messages: 1302
Registered: February 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
The man who made that movie obviously knows nothing about plane crashes. A plane flying 550 miles per hour will literally vaporize into nothing after slamming into a building.
WHATEVER, FAGGOT
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 9/11: The Pantagon... [message #113102] |
Sat, 04 September 2004 21:15 |
z310
Messages: 2459
Registered: July 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
| Quote: |
Yea, I believed the movie. Too many things mentioned that only require common sense to understand. And if " a plane would vaporize" why dont normal plane crashes vaproize?
|
Theres times when a plane crashes going around that speed.
|
|
|
|
| 9/11: The Pantagon... [message #113103] |
Sat, 04 September 2004 21:23 |
|
|
The tail of the aircraft would be still there...
Plus there's no way in hell that a plane that big would be flying that low in a urban area...
I suck cock and love it... absolutely love it. And I just got banned for being too immature to be allowed to post here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 9/11: The Pantagon... [message #113116] |
Sat, 04 September 2004 23:20 |
 |
NeoSaber
Messages: 336
Registered: February 2003
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
The movie might have some credibility if it didn't discredit its own evidence.
It throws up a bunch of quotes from people who said it sounded like a missile. Then it puts up quotes from people who saw a plane.
It talks about how the lawn in front of the pentagon was undamaged, suggesting something small must have hit it from a higher angle. They discredit this idea almost immeditately, twice. First when they trace the flight path to the point of impact on the birds eye view of the pentagon, you can indeed see that the ground along the flight path is different than the grass around it. It looks like the grass was torn up by something large going across it. Then it shows security camera footage of a large fast moving object coming across the lawn and striking the pentagon at ground level. They try to divert your attention from this obvious flaw in their theory by asking if the blur looks like a 757. However, they won't show you a scale comparision of a 757 to the Pentagon. They just show distance shots of a 757. For all we know the image they show of a 'real 757' is a model and it might as well be because we can't get a size comparison from it.
The movie questions how a large plane could only make a small hole after plowing through several layers of reinforced steel and concrete, but doesn't really get into how the hole of the initial impact is large enough to be a fuselage impact and that the hole even fans out at the bottom matching where large wings and engines would hit.
At one point it shows a quote saying the wings and tail should have sheared off when the plane hit. The idea of this is to plant the idea in your head that experts think the tail would have broken off and been easily found. However if you look at where the quote is from, it was a reporter asking a question at a briefing. It's not an expert talking, just someone with no experience asking the question. Although I don't have the footage right in front of me to review, when the planes hit the world trade towers I don't recall the wings and tail bouncing off the buildings. They plowed right through the steel wall they struck.
It claims that the terrorist who crashed the plane into the pentagon didn't have enough skill to fly it. It backs this up with two quotes from people at a flying school. Not enough evidence to even be worth discrediting, so they try to change the subject quickly by saying there's more evidence that the government won't release.
Frankly, I don't care if there are more tapes since the creators of this movie haven't raised any credible doubt to the official story. As a matter of fact, their obviously flawed presentation of their 'evidence' only serves to strengthen the official story by discrediting all the conspiracy theories. Why would anyone believe anything in this movie? I just saw it for the first time 20 minutes ago and I've already realized enough major flaws in it to discredit the whole basis of their evidence.
NeoSaber
Renegade Map Maker at CnC Source
Animator/Compiler/Level Editor/Object Rigger/Programmer for Red Alert: A Path Beyond
[Updated on: Sun, 05 September 2004 11:29] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
|
|
| 9/11: The Pantagon... [message #113166] |
Sun, 05 September 2004 05:15 |
 |
SuperFlyingEngi
Messages: 1756
Registered: November 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| bigejoe14 |
The man who made that movie obviously knows nothing about plane crashes. A plane flying 550 miles per hour will literally vaporize into nothing after slamming into a building.
|
There would still be large pieces of plane garbage, like a tail fin or something. At least, that's how it seems to go down in every other plane crash. [Not just from what I saw in that video]
Well, that's a really neat video, but I want to see more. Nice find.
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)
"The danger to political dissent is acute where the Government attempts to act under so vague a concept as the power to protect "domestic security." Given the difficulty of defining the domestic security interest, the danger of abuse in acting to protect that interest becomes apparent. --U.S. Supreme Court decision (407 U.S. 297 (1972)
The Liberal Media At Work
An objective look at media partisanship
|
|
|
|
| 9/11: The Pantagon... [message #113173] |
Sun, 05 September 2004 06:42 |
 |
exnyte
Messages: 746
Registered: February 2003
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
| SuperFlyingEngi |
At least, that's how it seems to go down in every other plane crash.
|
That can't really be used as a comparison since there isn't very many other plane crashes where a plane hits a building and such a rate of speed, at that angle.
American Cancer Society | Donate
|
|
|
|
| 9/11: The Pantagon... [message #113202] |
Sun, 05 September 2004 10:00 |
 |
NukeIt15
Messages: 987
Registered: February 2003
Location: Out to lunch
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
There's a massive difference between accidental crashes and intentional ones. The aircraft involved in the 9/11 attacks were all near fully fueled at the tyime they impacted their targets- accidental crashes involving aircraft and buildings typically happen either on landing, when the aircraft is low on fuel, or on takeoff, when the aircraft is traveling at a relatively low rate of speed(and often a high angle of attack). Neither of those conditions existed in this case.
And no, there would not necessarily be a whole lot of wreckage- jet fuel burns extremely hot, hot enough to melt or burn almost the entire aircraft. In an ordinary explosion, there would be a significant amount of wreckage as the airframe would be spread out before the fire could reach certain parts of the plane. However, we are talking about an aircraft crashing into a building that was designed specifically to CONTAIN explosions, fires, etc. The whole aircraft went into the same spot, so the whole thing burned- the only parts of the plane that are designed to withstand that kind of heat are the engine turbines(which woud have been more or less completely destroyed anyway, from impacting a building as sturdy as the Pentagon) It's really not that difficult of a concept.
The aircraft that crashed into the Pentagon was a smaller Boeng jet, I believe it was a 757(a small to midsize jetliner usually used for domestic flights and flights to neighboring countries), which is larger than the 737 and 727, but smaller than the wide body 767. Considering that all of the eywitnesses were far away from the building and aircraft, it might have looked very small, especially when compared with a building of the Pentagon's size. A missile would have been too small to see clearly at such distances, and a smaller aircraft could not have caused such extensive damage.
Then, of course, the largest single flaw in this bullshit conspiracy theory- if the plane that hit the Pentagon was a small aircraft or missile, then where the fuck did the airliner go? The flight was tracked on radar right up until it went into the building, so unless 757's have suddenly become capable of trans-substantiation, there's no way this is even possible.
"Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. Horrid mischief would ensue were (the law-abiding) deprived of the use of them." - Thomas Paine
Remember, kids: illiteracy is cool. If you took the time to read this, you are clearly a loser who will never get laid. You've been warned.
|
|
|
|
| 9/11: The Pantagon... [message #113211] |
Sun, 05 September 2004 10:45 |
|
bigejoe14
Messages: 1302
Registered: February 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
In addition to the jet fuel thing, planes are made out of titanium. Titanium metal burns with an intense heat and an intense bright white color. It will burn until nothing is left and it is almost impossible to put out the fire by conventional means. So not only could the plane have vaporized upon impact, but the bruning wreckage can contribute to the fact that there was hardly anything left of the plane after the fires were put out.
WHATEVER, FAGGOT
|
|
|
|
| 9/11: The Pantagon... [message #113214] |
Sun, 05 September 2004 11:24 |
|
|
Planes are made out of titanium? Wtf.
I suck cock and love it... absolutely love it. And I just got banned for being too immature to be allowed to post here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 9/11: The Pantagon... [message #113232] |
Sun, 05 September 2004 13:33 |
|
NukeIt15
Messages: 987
Registered: February 2003
Location: Out to lunch
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
| Quote: |
Another two questions about this theory
|
It isn't even a theory, really. Theories have factual evidence and observations to back them up and suggest that they have some credibility. This is simply something some idiot pulled out of their ass.
"Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. Horrid mischief would ensue were (the law-abiding) deprived of the use of them." - Thomas Paine
Remember, kids: illiteracy is cool. If you took the time to read this, you are clearly a loser who will never get laid. You've been warned.
|
|
|
|
| 9/11: The Pantagon... [message #113236] |
Sun, 05 September 2004 14:00 |
|
bigejoe14
Messages: 1302
Registered: February 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| Quote: |
And what happened to the people who were on the plane?
|
They were blown to bits along with the plane.
WHATEVER, FAGGOT
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 9/11: The Pantagon... [message #113258] |
Sun, 05 September 2004 16:21 |
|
NukeIt15
Messages: 987
Registered: February 2003
Location: Out to lunch
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
The best quote under that link:
| Quote: |
Go make a nice hot campfire and get drunk on beer in cans. Throw empty cans in hot fire. Next day try and find said empty cans. They are the same place as that plane.
|
"Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. Horrid mischief would ensue were (the law-abiding) deprived of the use of them." - Thomas Paine
Remember, kids: illiteracy is cool. If you took the time to read this, you are clearly a loser who will never get laid. You've been warned.
|
|
|
|
| 9/11: The Pantagon... [message #113266] |
Sun, 05 September 2004 17:06 |
|
|
Huh, that's bullshit.
I suck cock and love it... absolutely love it. And I just got banned for being too immature to be allowed to post here.
|
|
|
|
| 9/11: The Pantagon... [message #113291] |
Sun, 05 September 2004 20:53 |
|
NukeIt15
Messages: 987
Registered: February 2003
Location: Out to lunch
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
Oh really? If you can provide evidence from another deliberate crash of a fully-fueled medium sized airliner into a heavily reinforced building that shows any large aircraft sections remaining after the crash, please, I'm all ears. Unless you actually have some kind of clue what you're talking about, don't.
"Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. Horrid mischief would ensue were (the law-abiding) deprived of the use of them." - Thomas Paine
Remember, kids: illiteracy is cool. If you took the time to read this, you are clearly a loser who will never get laid. You've been warned.
|
|
|
|
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
