In plane sight
Forums › General Discussion › In plane sight-
This is a program I just finished on Netflix. I am by no means a conspiracy theorist, can can explain almost all of this. The one part that really bugs me is the Pentagon. Where was the plane? A plane 185' wide only made a 60' hole? The tail fun is 60' high, yet the roofline is still intact. It made that small of a hole and still penetrated 27' of steel reinforced concrete? (Inner and outer walls are each 3 feet thick). If you've watched the video, what did you think? Disclaimer: I do not think its a conspiracy.
-
the plane would focus the energy of impact at a point and damage radiates out and forward fromthere. it also destroys the plane easier than the reinforced military building. therefore the hole/damaged section of building is not as big as the plane itself.
-
c. wrote:
the plane would focus the energy of impact at a point and damage radiates out and forward fromthere. it also destroys the plane easier than the reinforced military building. therefore the hole/damaged section of building is not as big as the plane itself.
I can buy that. Where's the debris field? Watch that show and keep it on mute. Look at the pics of the impact. Zero debris. Show me another plane crash with no debris. Nothing. Zip. Not a seat, not a single piece of luggage, nothing. At all.
-
i havent seen what your talking about but wouldnt the debris be thrust into the building by the force of impact? wouldnt the debris field and the damaged section of building be the same place? also there would be a release of a large amount if energy from such an impact in the presense of jet fuel. any debris from plane or building would have been subjected to extreme forces abd then extreme heat. much would be destroyed and anything left might not be identifiable to the untrained eye.
-
Debris could have burnt up.
-
c. wrote:
So what do you think happened to iti havent seen what your talking about but wouldnt the debris be thrust into the building by the force of impact? wouldnt the debris field and the damaged section of building be the same place? also there would be a release of a large amount if energy from such an impact in the presense of jet fuel. any debris from plane or building would have been subjected to extreme forces abd then extreme heat. much would be destroyed and anything left might not be identifiable to the untrained eye.
-
Lady Katsa wrote:
is it just not visible in photos or are you saying it wasnt there at all ever?c. wrote:
So what do you think happened to iti havent seen what your talking about but wouldnt the debris be thrust into the building by the force of impact? wouldnt the debris field and the damaged section of building be the same place? also there would be a release of a large amount if energy from such an impact in the presense of jet fuel. any debris from plane or building would have been subjected to extreme forces abd then extreme heat. much would be destroyed and anything left might not be identifiable to the untrained eye.
-
c. wrote:
i havent seen what your talking about but wouldnt the debris be thrust into the building by the force of impact? wouldnt the debris field and the damaged section of building be the same place? also there would be a release of a large amount if energy from such an impact in the presense of jet fuel. any debris from plane or building would have been subjected to extreme forces abd then extreme heat. much would be destroyed and anything left might not be identifiable to the untrained eye.
Watch that show on Netflix. There are no pics of any debris. Or any real fire damage. There are papers on the ground beside the hole. An open book on a wooden stool with no fire damage at all. Like I said, I don't believe it was a cover up, I just can't explain the pentagon. 8600 gallons of remaining jet fuel would have burned for days and left a MUCH larger mark.
-
I spent way too much time thinking about this subject. Very little of it makes sense. The hijackers were supposedly inexperienced pilots who could barely qualify on a Cessna, yet were able to execute this rapid spiraling decent, then level off just high enough to knock over some light poles and strike the ground floor of the building? The WTC planes' wings cut through structural steel, yet this plane's wings turned to dust on impact without even breaking a window? There must have been a hundred cameras on one of the most secure buildings in the world, yet the sole video evidence we have is 2 pixelated frames from a distant camera? I had to stop thinking about it for the sake of my own sanity. Thanks for bringing it up again 😜
-
c. wrote:
My bad I misquoted I meant to quote mackmechLady Katsa wrote:
is it just not visible in photos or are you saying it wasnt there at all ever?c. wrote:
So what do you think happened to iti havent seen what your talking about but wouldnt the debris be thrust into the building by the force of impact? wouldnt the debris field and the damaged section of building be the same place? also there would be a release of a large amount if energy from such an impact in the presense of jet fuel. any debris from plane or building would have been subjected to extreme forces abd then extreme heat. much would be destroyed and anything left might not be identifiable to the untrained eye.
-
I saw th same. Do NOT wach wile on drugs!
-
quick google search brought up dozens of photos. lots of debris in some of the close up pictures but no way to tell what it is (i cant tell anyway). the only way to tell what belonged to what would be close up and hands on and to know what your looking for. some if the windows arent broken but wgat kind of windows are they? it is a military building after all.
-
The guy that flew this plane was the worst of the bunch according to that flight school in Florida. His instructor said something like "I was afraid to fly with him, he was so lacking in focus and concentration." I'm paraphrasing. For that matter, all three plane strikes on 9/11 were like threading a needle at 500 mph according to many airline pilots. I remain pretty convinced that they were either Saudi military pilots or the luckiest SOB's on earth. Dammit, here I go again. Say, how deep does this rabbit hole go?.......
-
★fnord★ wrote:
👆I spent way too much time thinking about this subject. Very little of it makes sense. The hijackers were supposedly inexperienced pilots who could barely qualify on a Cessna, yet were able to execute this rapid spiraling decent, then level off just high enough to knock over some light poles and strike the ground floor of the building? The WTC planes' wings cut through structural steel, yet this plane's wings turned to dust on impact without even breaking a window? There must have been a hundred cameras on one of the most secure buildings in the world, yet the sole video evidence we have is 2 pixelated frames from a distant camera? I had to stop thinking about it for the sake of my own sanity. Thanks for bringing it up again 😜
-
★fnord★ wrote:
saudis, iran, iraq, libya, take your pick of people who hate us and would have helped them. i always thought wtc would be easy to hit, you probably see them from far off and have time to line it up. but the pentagon sounds much more difficult with low profile abd visibility. you cant rule out lucky though just because its unlikely.The guy that flew this plane was the worst of the bunch according to that flight school in Florida. His instructor said something like "I was afraid to fly with him, he was so lacking in focus and concentration." I'm paraphrasing. For that matter, all three plane strikes on 9/11 were like threading a needle at 500 mph according to many airline pilots. I remain pretty convinced that they were either Saudi military pilots or the luckiest SOB's on earth. Dammit, here I go again. Say, how deep does this rabbit hole go?.......
-
Every form of government needs to enact some kind of population control so we don't over populate ourselves and eliminate our food supply. Mexico has the cartels which can be stopped yet Mexico refuses to actually do something about the problem. Some smaller European/arabian countries openly kill their own people with gas or other means eliminating whole populations. The US creates a conspiracy with 9/11 as an excuse to go to war. A war we won within the year yet continue to stay there and waste more lives. Population control. And as we continue to destroy our planet we will be seeing more of it. People need to read the book BEHOLD A PALE HORSE
-
This is one of the conspiracy theorist 'gotchas' that is easily explained.
In the 70's NASA did an experiment to see what an airplane would do if it were to crash into a reinforced concrete wall. So they took an F4 and ran it down a rocket track. What they found was the impact completely disenegrated the aircraft. There was absolutely nothing left, and the impact did not seem to resemble an aircraft at all.
The pentagon has reinforced exterior, so the experiment translates well. I'll see if can find the video.
-
mojopilot wrote:
exactly. its a military structure not your house. its built to take on a direct attack. and if the government wanted "population control" we already have a great money making form if that : mcdonalds. nothing like paying for your heart disease.This is one of the conspiracy theorist 'gotchas' that is easily explained.
In the 70's NASA did an experiment to see what an airplane would do if it were to crash into a reinforced concrete wall. So they took an F4 and ran it down a rocket track. What they found was the impact completely disenegrated the aircraft. There was absolutely nothing left, and the impact did not seem to resemble an aircraft at all.
The pentagon has reinforced exterior, so the experiment translates well. I'll see if can find the video.
-
LIL TAZORG©®™ wrote:
You've got to be kidding, right? A well equipped and trained military going up against what is effectively a band of McGeivers in order to kill off our guys is just crazy. I can accept your premise, but what you're saying just doesn't make sense.Every form of government needs to enact some kind of population control so we don't over populate ourselves and eliminate our food supply. Mexico has the cartels which can be stopped yet Mexico refuses to actually do something about the problem. Some smaller European/arabian countries openly kill their own people with gas or other means eliminating whole populations. The US creates a conspiracy with 9/11 as an excuse to go to war. A war we won within the year yet continue to stay there and waste more lives. Population control. And as we continue to destroy our planet we will be seeing more of it. People need to read the book BEHOLD A PALE HORSE
-
c. wrote:
The second WTC plane was banking pretty hard when it hit due to a major correction in the last few seconds...at 400+ knots they said.★fnord★ wrote:
saudis, iran, iraq, libya, take your pick of people who hate us and would have helped them. i always thought wtc would be easy to hit, you probably see them from far off and have time to line it up. but the pentagon sounds much more difficult with low profile abd visibility. you cant rule out lucky though just because its unlikely.✂
-
Think about it. We send our military to fight a bunch of people who are skilled in a fight style we are not in a terrain we are not familiar with at first. Never knowing who is gonna attack. Element of surprise on their part. If we are so good then why are we still loosing soldiers. I guess I just see it differently.
-
http://youtu.be/xM8E-CogkYE
That's the video I spoke of.
I am a pilot and flight instructor, I have flown with dozens upon dozens of inexperienced people and can say that with basic instruction it's not hard for most people to point an airplane in the right direction, even in 3 dimensions. Yes, it is threading a needle at 500mph, but its a big needle and a responsive thread. These guys practiced with flight simulators, that is enough, in my professional opinion, to give them a fighting chance at doing what they did.
I don't doubt the guy was called a scary student, I've had a few students I was afraid to fly with. It was never because they can't fly, it's because they make stupid decisions. They are typically good stick and rudder pilots and that builds false confidence in the instructor.
-
LIL TAZORG©®™ wrote:
Wait your premise is that in a country of over 300 million, our form of population control is to go to war abroad to lose 5,000 soldiers? This might take a while.Think about it. We send our military to fight a bunch of people who are skilled in a fight style we are not in a terrain we are not familiar with at first. Never knowing who is gonna attack. Element of surprise on their part. If we are so good then why are we still loosing soldiers. I guess I just see it differently.
I'd say abortion-on-demand, mass production of processed food for low income folks, and general health care barriers are a much more effective form of population control. Not that I believe any of them are intended to specifically halt the growth of our population.
-
LIL TAZORG©®™ wrote:
6,171 people die per day in the US according to the census. That's about equal to the American deaths for the last ten years in Iraq and Afghanistan. Your population control theory is bullshit.Every form of government needs to enact some kind of population control so we don't over populate ourselves and eliminate our food supply. Mexico has the cartels which can be stopped yet Mexico refuses to actually do something about the problem. Some smaller European/arabian countries openly kill their own people with gas or other means eliminating whole populations. The US creates a conspiracy with 9/11 as an excuse to go to war. A war we won within the year yet continue to stay there and waste more lives. Population control. And as we continue to destroy our planet we will be seeing more of it. People need to read the book BEHOLD A PALE HORSE
-
better ways to kill us than the war:
1 abortion
2 tobacco
3 less safety regs on cars
4 less safety regs on anything
5 trans fats
6 super size it!
7 holding a device that emits radio waves next to you genitals while typeing codes for hours on end.
8 no weather warnings
9 less police officers
10 getting old -
I have watched a program on the Discovery Channel and it is eye opening to see this forgotten event. The government tends to hide this event and the details about it. The program showed pictures of a stack of paper less than 3 feet away from the hole perfectly untouched. The computer screen next to it didn't have a scratch. The entire desk did not have anything pushed over. Quite strange indeed.
-
ChubsTheWalrus wrote:
I'm not convinced that there could be a reliable source for pictures inside the pentagon to start with.I have watched a program on the Discovery Channel and it is eye opening to see this forgotten event. The government tends to hide this event and the details about it.
Then take a plane, or even missle as some say, run it into a wall and tell me how papers would be untouched. There is no doubt there was a high energy event at the pentagon; I think people on either side would agree on that. I also think both sides would agree its going to be hard to get into just about any room of the pentagon and take pictures.
Put those two together and I have rational evidence that says the discovery channel doesn't believe in common sense. A point proven by classics like Amish mafia and Texas car wars.
![[][]](https://turfwarsapp.com/img/app/ajax-forbutton.gif)
Purchase Respect Points NEW! · Support · Turf Map · Terms · Privacy
©2021 MeanFreePath LLC