[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Any knucklehead that actually needed to see any new video to know that a plane hit the pentagon, probably also requires a diagram to put their own pants on.

[Hornet]

I believe a plane never hit the Pentagon

You all *NEED* to see the video 'loose change 9-11' - it's a fantastic summary of the conspiracy theories of the pentagon, twin towers, and the 4th flight. Specific to this discussion it's great. After watching it I can honestly say where the HELL did the boeing go? It was never there.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...20890224991194

Well, well worth the watch. You can find higher quality versions of it elsewhere for download, but the google video one may do.

[His Dudeness]

[MontyPython]It's only a model.[/MontyPython]

[smacintush]

Well, I am not a conspiracy person by a long shot, and I think the loose change video is retarded and full of obvious flaws.

Buuuut…the pentagon video sure doesn't look like a plane to me. At least not the kind of plane it was supposed to be. With the speed of the camera it would take only one more frame to see what it was but magically we can't see sh*t. Just by my own guess there should be at least another frame from the time we see the nose to when we see the explosion. Just seems a little off to me.

[krillbee]

Originally Posted by smacintush

Well, I am not a conspiracy person by a long shot, and I think the loose change video is retarded and full of obvious flaws.

Buuuut…the pentagon video sure doesn't look like a plane to me. At least not the kind of plane it was supposed to be. With the speed of the camera it would take only one more frame to see what it was but magically we can't see sh*t. Just by my own guess there should be at least another frame from the time we see the nose to when we see the explosion. Just seems a little off to me.

yeah, im sure with all the videos that the FBI confiscated they have to have SOME video better than that.

and it definately looks like a frame or 2 was deleted. And it took them a long time to provide the video...

[starman]

edit: found it.

[Y3a]

only with ADDED OXYGEN during cremation do you get "Just Ashes"

Modern Jet Airplanes use Monocouqe construction, so the outside parts contribute to the rigidity of the craft. the frame just holds the parts in place. hitting a stone wall destroys the integrity of the frame, and it folds into shriveled aluminum etc. The plane that hit the swamp was little bits due to impact, but no fire. the planes that hit water are small parts too. burning jet fuel is hot enough to soften metal, and the pentagon building is made of heavy enough stuff to cave in on a light weight airplane crushing the little bits even more. They used DNA to identify the bodies from the Pentagon anyway. Jeez you guys are dumb.

[His Dudeness]

Plus the fact that the jet that hit the Pentagon was going about 500 mph, and it was recorded with a security camera that is not equipped to shoot high frame rates...

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by His Dudeness

[MontyPython]It's only a model.[/MontyPython]

SHH!!

[PacHead]

Originally Posted by His Dudeness

Plus the fact that the jet that hit the Pentagon was going about 500 mph, and it was recorded with a security camera that is not equipped to shoot high frame rates...

Hey now, don't be too harsh on any conspiracy idiots who lack the education and understanding in complicated areas such as seventh grade physics, preschool math and plain old common sense. Maybe the pentagon should set up high speed HD cameras outside from now on, incase they're hit again, inorder to convince even the most stupidest of people.

[Rumor]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE

Any knucklehead that actually needed to see any new video to know that a plane hit the pentagon, probably also requires a diagram to put their own pants on.

I bet if you drew up a diagram, you could sell it on eBay.

[stevesnj]

Originally Posted by Hornet

I believe a plane never hit the Pentagon

You all *NEED* to see the video 'loose change 9-11' - it's a fantastic summary of the conspiracy theories of the pentagon, twin towers, and the 4th flight. Specific to this discussion it's great. After watching it I can honestly say where the HELL did the boeing go? It was never there.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...20890224991194

Well, well worth the watch. You can find higher quality versions of it elsewhere for download, but the google video one may do.

Tell this to the people burned by jet fuel and who are scared for life.

[Severed Hand of Skywalker]

I have to say it is a shame the terrorists died. They are some of the best pilots I have ever seen.

Taking a plane that have only used in simulation and practically landing it spot on to a 4 story building is nothing short of remarkable.

Same goes for the ones that were piloting into WTC at such high speeds with a turn.

[Rumor]

Originally Posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker

I have to say it is a shame the terrorists died. They are some of the best pilots I have ever seen.

Taking a plane that have only used in simulation and practically landing it spot on to a 4 story building is nothing short of remarkable.

Same goes for the ones that were piloting into WTC at such high speeds with a turn.

[sek929]

How did a 757 vaporize?

This is all I want to know. Where the hell did it go, and how did jet fuel (basically diesel) vaporize the fuselage, the tailfin, and the wings? Oh yeah, and the Titanium engines, those couldn't have possibly been melted by jet fuel. Also, why was the grass perfect next to the "crash site" most airplane crashes I've seen involve alot of plane-shaped parts scattered about and at least 10 feet of grass ripped up.

Besides that the "loose change" video is alot of garbage, especially about the WTC being taken down by secondary explosions.

I'm not much into conspiracy theories, but the Pentagon baffles me.

Y3a, you say people who believe in the theory are idiots, but don't you just believe in someone else's theory?

We are not getting the full picture here, and the release of this "video" is a joke.

[Severed Hand of Skywalker]

Sek I have seen photos where they have shown plenty of plane wreckage after the pentagon crash.

Planes are light. I mean look at other crashes there is normally not much left bigger than a foot.

[Obi Wan's Ghost]

Let it go. Whatever happened, today Islamists are being looked on by more and more Muslims as the worst aspect of their society.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker

I have to say it is a shame the terrorists died. They are some of the best pilots I have ever seen.

Taking a plane that have only used in simulation and practically landing it spot on to a 4 story building is nothing short of remarkable.

Same goes for the ones that were piloting into WTC at such high speeds with a turn.

You do realize of course there's an infinite gulf between ACTUALLY piloting and landing a plane properly (IE: what actually IS a skilled pilot) vs. merely steering and crashing one willy-nilly into a building and killing yourself and everyone on board.

Anyone's grandmother could do the later. It's about as remarkable as you high-speed 'piloting' your car into someone's living room.


Another aside: where did the crazy idea come from anyway that the entire plane just 'vaporized' and that there was no wreckage?

Ohhhhh... that's right. Various crackpot conspiracies that don't have even a shred of the facts straight.

Meanwhile, back on planet earth, there are plenty of photos clearly showing a debris feild.

[Y3a]

Originally Posted by sek929

Y3a, you say people who believe in the theory are idiots, but don't you just believe in someone else's theory?

I LIVE in the Northern Virginia area, know folks who worked at the Pentagon, and drove by to see the aftermath. i've seen the cranes putting the remains of a jet engine on a flatbed. if you take an aircraft the size of the 757 and remove the engines, and crush it into a cube, it'll be a smaller than you'd imagine cube-about 4 feet. Remember the plane that went down in the swamps? it was teeny pieces about paper plate size. It hit water and mud. The Pentagon is brick, stone and that part of the bldg was recently upgraded to be LOTS stronger than the rest of the bldg.

I know, you'd rather be paranoid, but thats what happens when you take too many drugs.

[Severed Hand of Skywalker]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE

You do realize of course there's an infinite gulf between ACTUALLY piloting and landing a plane properly (IE: what actually IS a skilled pilot) vs. merely steering and crashing one willy-nilly into a building and killing yourself and everyone on board.

Nope. Flying a plane that large that fast for that long so close to the ground and hitting your target spot on is NOT easy. They flew so low they clipped light poles.

[King Bob On The Cob]

Originally Posted by sek929

How did a 757 vaporize?

This is all I want to know. Where the hell did it go, and how did jet fuel (basically diesel) vaporize the fuselage, the tailfin, and the wings? Oh yeah, and the Titanium engines, those couldn't have possibly been melted by jet fuel. Also, why was the grass perfect next to the "crash site" most airplane crashes I've seen involve alot of plane-shaped parts scattered about and at least 10 feet of grass ripped up.

jet fuel is not "basically diesel".

"Commercial jet fuel, known as Jet-A, is pure kerosene and has a flashpoint of 120 degrees Fahrenheit (49 degrees Celsius). It is a high-quality fuel, however, and if it fails the purity and other quality tests for use on jet aircraft, it is sold to other ground-based users with less demanding requirements, like railroad engines. Commercial jet fuel as well as military jet fuel often includes anti-freeze to prevent ice buildup inside the fuel tanks."

http://www.centennialofflight.gov/es...uel/Tech21.htm

132,500 BTU in 1 gallon of kerosene
1 BTU = 1055.06 joule
so 10,000 gallons kerosene = 1,397,954,500,000 Joules = 1.40 x 10 ^ 12 Joules

http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtopic=3108&st=45

I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to know that that is FARKING HOT.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker

Nope. Flying a plane that large that fast for that long so close to the ground and hitting your target spot on is NOT easy.

You assume the size of the plane makes it harder to fly. It doesn't.

They didn't hit the target 'spot on', they merely "hit" it. By all accounts, the way they hit did realativly little damage to the pentagon- they could have hit much more vital areas had they known more. Also, by coming in at such a low angle they lost a lot of momentum which would have done far more damage to the target.

They flew so low they clipped light poles.

Again, the idea of flying a plane is not to clip things you're not intending to, and crash. THat's not flying a plane, it's called crashing one. There's nothing remarkable in that.

Anyone could have taken the same flight training they did and crashed a plane. (Talk about the ultimate "learning just enough to be dangerous"! ) The difference is, most people aren't insane fanatics that would ever want to, nor try and tout up nutjobs that did.

[ThinkInsane]

Originally Posted by sek929

How did a 757 vaporize?

This is all I want to know. Where the hell did it go, and how did jet fuel (basically diesel) vaporize the fuselage, the tailfin, and the wings? Oh yeah, and the Titanium engines, those couldn't have possibly been melted by jet fuel. Also, why was the grass perfect next to the "crash site" most airplane crashes I've seen involve alot of plane-shaped parts scattered about and at least 10 feet of grass ripped up.

Besides that the "loose change" video is alot of garbage, especially about the WTC being taken down by secondary explosions.

I'm not much into conspiracy theories, but the Pentagon baffles me.

Y3a, you say people who believe in the theory are idiots, but don't you just believe in someone else's theory?

We are not getting the full picture here, and the release of this "video" is a joke.

It didn't vaporize. There was wreckage all over the place. It was all over the lawn in front of the impact site, as well as inside the building. Here's a video of what happens when a plane smashes into reinforced concrete: http://www.boreme.com/boreme/funny-2...oncrete-p1.php

Granted, that's an F-4, not a 757, but that size and weight difference would explain the penetration through the building that we saw at the Pentagon where the F-4 just disintegrates without penetrating.


This site does a pretty good job of going through the loose change video step by step and correcting the many factual errors and unsubstantiated claims made in the video. It's be worth the time of anyone that doubts a plane hit that building to go through the site and give the points made due consideration.

At work, our new state of the art digital video surveillance cameras record at 5 fps. Our old equipment recorded at 1 fps. The plane was traveling at 500+ mph at the time of impact. Doesn't it stand to reason that something traveling that fast wouldn't be entirely visible on a recording made at 1 fps?

[Hornet]

Originally Posted by ThinkInsane

It didn't vaporize. There was wreckage all over the place.

That hardly constitutes serious wreackage; just small pieces of metal. Where are the seriously huge chunks of plane? Engines? Huge chunks of fuselage structure?

It doesn't look like they are in the building either. have a look at the loose change video. The holes the plane left in the wall are barely big enough for the components of the plane to be embedded somewhere, above or below ground, inside the Pentagon.

Don't believe everything your media throws at you

edit: oh and ill have a look through that link ThinkInsane on loose change, looks interesting. ta

[ThinkInsane]

Originally Posted by Hornet

That hardly constitutes serious wreackage; just small pieces of metal. Where are the seriously huge chunks of plane? Engines? Huge chunks of fuselage structure?

It doesn't look like they are in the building either. have a look at the loose change video. The holes the plane left in the wall are barely big enough for the components of the plane to be embedded somewhere, above or below ground, inside the Pentagon.

Don't believe everything your media throws at you

edit: oh and ill have a look through that link ThinkInsane on loose change, looks interesting. ta

And again, look at the video I linked above at what happens to an airplane when it its reinforced concrete at 500 mph. Of course there isn't big pieces. An airliner is a flying house trailer. Launch a house trailer full of jet fuel into a wall at 500 mph and tell me what's left. Or better yet, read through the site I linked where every thing in loose change is picked apart. I've watched loose change, don't you think the interests of fairness and truth dictate you take a critical look at the other side before you proclaim that loose change is the god's honest truth?

Also, the site I linked shows pictures from before the collapse that clear show a hole in the outer wall much lager than the "16 feet" claimed so often.

EDIT: Sorry, I didn't see where you said you would check the site out. I did see somethings on there they may be errors as well, but for the most part it seems to be pretty well researched, especially in regard to the "experts" quoted in loose change.

[His Dudeness]

Small pieces of metal from a jet going over 500 mph doesn't constitute wreckage? I'm obviously living on a different planet.

[His Dudeness]

I'm watching Loose Change on Google, although it should be called Loose Cannons... anyway, I don't know where this moronic embicile was getting his "facts" but the Empire State Building was not impacted by a damn B-52... it was a DC-9 or something like that.

And at one point someone was quoted as saying that they saw a C-130 flying around. Pretty good I guess, if you can tell what a C-130 looks like at that altitude that the photo showed. And the same guy was saying that it looked like a "Navy electronic warfare aicraft"... What the hell? The Navy owns C-130's? And I'm in the Navy, and I would be hard pressed to tell you the difference at altitude between a C-130 and an EC-130...

[sek929]

Originally Posted by Y3a

I LIVE in the Northern Virginia area, know folks who worked at the Pentagon, and drove by to see the aftermath. i've seen the cranes putting the remains of a jet engine on a flatbed. if you take an aircraft the size of the 757 and remove the engines, and crush it into a cube, it'll be a smaller than you'd imagine cube-about 4 feet. Remember the plane that went down in the swamps? it was teeny pieces about paper plate size. It hit water and mud. The Pentagon is brick, stone and that part of the bldg was recently upgraded to be LOTS stronger than the rest of the bldg.

I know, you'd rather be paranoid, but thats what happens when you take too many drugs.

I'm not paranoid, as you put it, I'm curious about the facts. If it was a direct hit, then it was a damn good job of aiming, since it didn't touch the grass on the way to the concrete wall.

I said earlier that the "Loose Change" video is full of B.S. but it brings up a few good questions.

But, by all means, continue being a jerk...because you have all the facts.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by His Dudeness

I'm watching Loose Change on Google, although it should be called Loose Cannons... anyway, I don't know where this moronic embicile was getting his "facts" but the Empire State Building was not impacted by a damn B-52... it was a DC-9 or something like that.

It was a B-25 bomber. Seems like they juxtaposed the numbers- probably purposefully. Not only is a B-52 much bigger than the B-25, they didn't even exist in 1945 when the crash happened.

[Y3a]

Originally Posted by sek929

I'm not paranoid, as you put it, I'm curious about the facts. If it was a direct hit, then it was a damn good job of aiming, since it didn't touch the grass on the way to the concrete wall.

I said earlier that the "Loose Change" video is full of B.S. but it brings up a few good questions.

But, by all means, continue being a jerk...because you have all the facts.

Why don't you study up on aircraft consruction, and physics? That will give you better tools to see thru the BS.

[Rumor]

Did anyone notice the date on the video?

[His Dudeness]

Originally Posted by sek929

I'm not paranoid, as you put it, I'm curious about the facts. If it was a direct hit, then it was a damn good job of aiming, since it didn't touch the grass on the way to the concrete wall.

I said earlier that the "Loose Change" video is full of B.S. but it brings up a few good questions.

But, by all means, continue being a jerk...because you have all the facts.

And you do, just because you watched that silly Loose Cannons video on google?

[Rumor]

Originally Posted by His Dudeness

And you do, just because you watched that silly Loose Cannons video on google?

Not anywhere does he say that. Stop twisting.

[His Dudeness]

Watching one of these silly videos should not raise questions and doubts about the whole thing. These videos are pathetic.

[black bear theory]

Originally Posted by Rumor

Did anyone notice the date on the video?

no. if it's before 9/11 then that would be something!

Originally Posted by sek929

I said earlier that the "Loose Change" video is full of B.S. but it brings up a few good questions.

those few good questions probably have good answers as well... which ones are they? it's no good not trying to get them answered.

conspiracy theories usually hinge on a few tenuous perceptions, and once those start to dissappear, the whole house of cards starts to tumble rapidly.

[Severed Hand of Skywalker]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE

You assume the size of the plane makes it harder to fly. It doesn't.

How long have you been piloting planes?

[itistoday]

Originally Posted by Hornet

I believe a plane never hit the Pentagon

You all *NEED* to see the video 'loose change 9-11' - it's a fantastic summary of the conspiracy theories of the pentagon, twin towers, and the 4th flight. Specific to this discussion it's great. After watching it I can honestly say where the HELL did the boeing go? It was never there.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...20890224991194

Well, well worth the watch. You can find higher quality versions of it elsewhere for download, but the google video one may do.

JESUS F*CKING CHRIST!



HELLO???? WTF! Why aren't there massive investigations into these allegations????


What's going on? Why is everyone ignoring this?

Person: 1 + 1 = 2

America: Huh? I don't care. You're lying

Are there any counter-claims to this video? The evidence presented here is pretty f*cking damning.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker

How long have you been piloting planes?

I've never flown a plane, have you? Why don't you ask a pilot? There are several floating around these boards somewhere that have already chimed in on the matter.

A REAL pilot by the way, is one that knows how to take off and land without clipping light posts, crashing into buildings, and killing themselves and their passengers.

[Severed Hand of Skywalker]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE

I've never flown a plane, have you? Why don't you ask a pilot? There are several floating around these boards somewhere that have already chimed in on the matter.

Thanks but I got my private pilots license in 1997.

And I stand by my original statement. But go ahead, let us know better.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by itistoday

Are there any counter-claims to this video? The evidence presented here is pretty f*cking damning.

You can't be serious.

Did you perchance even glance at any of the rest of the thread?

[itistoday]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE

You can't be serious.

Did you perchance even glance at any of the rest of the thread?

No. *blushes*

Actually, right now I'm reading a site that refutes the claims in that video:
http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker

Thanks but I got my private pilots license in 1997.

And I stand by my original statement. But go ahead, let us know better.

Sure you did. Before or after you ate the crackerjacks?

How many light poles have you clipped, and buildings have you flown into? After all, that's your definition of "the best pilots you've ever seen".

[production_coordinator]

Originally Posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker

Thanks but I got my private pilots license in 1997.

And I stand by my original statement. But go ahead, let us know better.

I visit the Pentagon every day.

1) The terrorists were trained to fly aircraft (to some degree).
2) The pentagon is VERY large.

I'm confident that will minimal training, I could pilot an in-air aircraft into such a building.

If they were good enough to hit the twin towers... what makes anyone thing it would be more/less difficult to hit the Pentagon.

And to anyone that says that it wasn't damaged all that much... You obviously didn't see all the damage.

[Rumor]

Supposedly, the date on the video the gov released is dated 9/12. I haven't seen the video yet myself, which is why I asked.

[itistoday]

Mmmk... finished reading that site. It misses several key points, like the fact that "Bin Laden" in the tape was wearing a watch, and that he really didn't look much like the real Bin Laden. It also doesn't address the fact that Titanium doesn't melt at the temperatures that were in the WTC. Additionally, it fails to address both the video and eye witness evidence for the explosions that happened as the building collapsed. You can clearly and visibly see explosions going off on the floors below the collapsing towers, just as would appear in a demolition.

All in all, it's very unlikely that the WTC collapsed because of the planes. What about the molten steal found in the basement? Or how about the eyewitness accounts of equipment missing from the basement? How was any of this possible just from burning fuel? Those steal and titanium beams don't melt at those temperatures.

How about the passport that somehow managed to survive the impact while the black boxes did not? What about the video tapes that the FBI took from the hotel and gas station and told everyone not to speak of what they had seen?

The Pentagon is just riddled with holes, and I have yet to see any good refutations of the conspiracies surrounding those. I think I'll search for them in this thread...

[Severed Hand of Skywalker]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE

Sure you did. Before or after you ate the crackerjacks?

How many light poles have you clipped, and buildings have you flown into? After all, that's your definition of "the best pilots you've ever seen".

You really want me to scan my license?

Anywho, the hardest part about flying is landing for the most part. This pilot eventually landed a plane EXACTY where he should, he wasn't off by a foot. Have having only experience in simulators landing on pretend runway does not compare to what this guy had to do.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by production_coordinator

And to anyone that says that it wasn't damaged all that much... You obviously didn't see all the damage.

It's not that there wasn't much damange. The damage was relatively light- considering we're talking about an airliner smacking into a ground structure. Hitting the reinforced side as they did and not a more weaker area (like the roof for example)- caused about as little damage as could be expected considering the scale of the incident.

Also coming in at such a shallow angle was a major mistake. A steeper angle would have meant much greater velocity, and far more damage at the point of impact.

It's a good thing they weren't actually better pilots or they'd have known all this.

[itistoday]

Before, when it was just that flash video about the pentagon, I had dismissed the claims and interesting but not compelling enough. But after watching Loose Change, it presented more evidence and connected all of the events of 9/11 into one grand conspiracy with really compelling visual evidence.

[PacHead]

A retarded chimpanzee could probably do a decent job of flying planes into buildings with a bit of training. Slitting throats and flying planes into buildings is not an impressive feat even though certain deranged posters on this forum believe so.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker

You really want me to scan my license?

Anywho, the hardest part about flying is landing for the most part. This pilot eventually landed a plane EXACTY where he should, he wasn't off by a foot.

LANDED the plane?!! At over 500mph into the side of building?


Sorry, no, I don't believe for an instant that you're a pilot if that's what you consider any kind of "landing".

And "wasn't off by a foot" compared to what??! Was there a bullseye on the side of that specific area of the pentagon that said "Crash plane right here!" or something? How tiny to you think the Pentagon is that anyone is talking about "missing it" by a foot?