The Pentagon on 9/11 - MODERATOR WARNING ISSUED

Discussion in '9/11' started by Bob0627, Nov 1, 2016.

You are viewing posts in the Conspiracy Theory forum. PF does not allow misinformation. However, please note that posts could occasionally contain content in violation of our policies prior to our staff intervening.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yet you’re wasting time here 24/7 posting mostly drivel. And you know it’s “BS” even though you refuse to watch it.

    If you were really curious you would do the research on your own like I did. But you’re absolutely correct, don’t waste your time just post relentless trolling drivel from off the top of your head.
     
  2. cjnewson88

    cjnewson88 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2013
    Messages:
    1,133
    Likes Received:
    31
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I don't know why you bother arguing the Vmo point, the fact AAL77 remained in tact, and controllable, until impact kind of proves you wrong instantly when you say it should have broken up lol
     
    Last edited: Sep 13, 2018
  3. yasureoktoo

    yasureoktoo Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2018
    Messages:
    9,808
    Likes Received:
    2,351
    Trophy Points:
    113

    Actually I'm not really curious,
    It came from someone's ass.
     
  4. yasureoktoo

    yasureoktoo Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2018
    Messages:
    9,808
    Likes Received:
    2,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    He was probably overspeed beyond recovery, but there is no actual number when it breaks up, and 2 identical planes may break up at different speeds.
     
  5. yasureoktoo

    yasureoktoo Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2018
    Messages:
    9,808
    Likes Received:
    2,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I realize you are here 24/7 monitoring who is here, but unlike you, I have a job, and I sleep at night.
     
  6. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Except I never said it should have broken up. Always with the fake hyperbole. I simply questioned why it didn’t break up. At least read my posts for comprehension before you invent false claims.
     
  7. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I’m well aware.

    You believe it came from the manufacturer’s ass? Of course you would you never do any research by your own admission. You decide what’s BS before you even bother to look at it because doing the research is a waste of time for you.
     
  8. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No way.
     
  9. yasureoktoo

    yasureoktoo Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2018
    Messages:
    9,808
    Likes Received:
    2,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No, not the manufacture, Actually most of the people I know work at Boeing or Microsoft.
    Truffers do not get any kudos from Boeing.
    But they are the butt, of many jokes.
     
    Last edited: Sep 13, 2018
  10. cjnewson88

    cjnewson88 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2013
    Messages:
    1,133
    Likes Received:
    31
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Why should it break up?
     
  11. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Read post #1025. The same applies.
     
  12. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Last edited: Sep 13, 2018
  13. cjnewson88

    cjnewson88 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2013
    Messages:
    1,133
    Likes Received:
    31
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Egypt air broke apart after hitting the sound barrier on a dive and then pulling almost 2.5 g to get out of the dive... if that's what you're referring to
     
  14. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Perhaps that was it. So you're confirming it exceeded VMO and broke apart as a result. And I'm being asked why I question that the alleged AA77 that exceeded VMO by about 110 knots (as the official story goes) did not break apart. What's also disingenuous about this (besides the obvious) is that I'm not being asked why I question the precision maneuverability of that alleged airliner at 110 knots over VMO. Personally, I don't give a **** about the utter ridiculousness of questioning me about my questions, it's all rhetorical, I'm just pointing out the obvious.

    It's always all about questioning the questioners. As if they have the audacity to question the thousands of outrageous official claims about what happened on 9/11 that are extremely intellectually insulting while never raising a single question themselves about anything official.
     
    Last edited: Sep 14, 2018
  15. cjnewson88

    cjnewson88 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2013
    Messages:
    1,133
    Likes Received:
    31
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Bob, you're not a pilot so I cannot expect you to know exactly what I mean by this, but going really fast in a straight line, and going really fast and then trying to change your direction really suddenly (such as pulling out of a Mach .99 dive) is going to give you very different results. Aircraft which fall apart in mid flight do not normally do so just because they went too fast. They do so because it was a combination of the speed they were going, and the abrupt g-forces they induced. I'll give you some examples:

    China Airlines 006: A 747 which went into an uncontrollable spin, pulled over 5g pulling out of its dive at 250kts. Thankfully the aircraft was near stall for most the event which meant its airspeed was relatively low. Nonetheless, the g-forces alone were enough to significantly damage the tail of the aircraft and left the wings permanently bent several degrees upwards. The aircraft was flown to San Fran airport where it was repaired and continued operating for another 20 years.

    Federal Express 705: Was a DC10 which during an attempted hijacking was flown at 530mph pulling turns and going inverted. It experienced aerodynamic flutter and landed over it maximum landing weight. It survived and continues to be operated to this day.

    EasyJet 737 G-EZJK: Was on a flight test which accidentally entered a dive and got up to 510mph. It's crew recovered it by pulling almost 2 g at 480mph. Again, this aircraft continues to operate to this day.

    The 2018 Horizon Air Q400 incident: A maintenance personnel with zero flight training took off a Q400 and successfully completed several aerodynamic manouvers with the aircraft remaining in tact.

    So, there are many examples available to us of aircraft which have gone far above their design limits and still survived. Let's look at one which didn't.

    Adam Air Flight 574: Was a Boeing 737 which entered a dive. It's airspeed increase to 560mph. At this point, the aircraft was still intact. However the pilot then induced a massive, and sudden, g-force change, pushing the aircraft from +3.5g to -2.8g. That's a total abrupt g-force change of over 6 g's.

    That is what it took to cause an airliner to disintegrate in mid air.

    What was AAL77 doing? When it rolled out of it's turn and started heading for the Pentagon, it was doing about 300mph. He then accelerated the jet, reaching 500mph barely seconds before impact. It's g-forces reached a max of 2g during his manouvers, within the 757's 2.5g tolerances. The visual reconstruction of the flight data recorder shows the pilot was pushing the controls forward to push the nose down towards the Pentagon, meaning the aircraft was likely producing less than 1g during its final few seconds. This 'unloading' of the aircraft is actually a technique trained to airline pilots to recover from unusual attitudes. It delays the stall, reduces the forces on the airframe and allows the aircraft to be more controllable. I'm not saying this is what the hijacker was trying to achieve, but it is noted that the aircraft would be able to withstand higher forces than normal thanks in part to this unloaded of the g-forces.
     
  16. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes thanks, I'm fully aware that G forces have a contributing effect on air speed to more likely precipitate a breakup. I don't need to be a pilot to know that, it's elementary physics. Like I said, I don't know if the plane should have broken up or not, it was merely one of thousands of question about the official narrative. That question actually should have been answered by the manufacturer but the manufacturer was never asked by any official investigation, like thousands of other questions that were never researched by any official investigation. There is no NTSB report and no FBI report, it's all CLASSIFIED because knowing the answers would "jeopardize our safety", we could all die a horrible death.

    As stated, I ask questions about the official narrative, those who bought it ask questions of the questioners and ask no questions about the official narrative. Worse, some of them are incessant apologists, believe they have every single answer even though the narrative is demonstrably whole cloth and even stoop down to the level of ridiculing the questioners.

    You haven't got a single clue, you're just regurgitating what you believe is true from out of that whole cloth. I'm not that easy. Unless and until they forensically and meticulously identify every single piece of physical debris allegedly recovered at the Pentagon (that can be identified) and produce a detailed report that conclusively matches all those identifiable pieces to AA77, there is NO conclusive evidence that AA77 was anywhere near the Pentagon at any time on 9/11/01. Accepting anything on faith from a proven pathological lying entity known as the US government is just not within the scope of anything that I would call intelligent. In fact, my position always begins with they're lying, because that's what they nearly ALWAYS do for every major event.

    I agree with this guy (RIP).

     
  17. Eleuthera

    Eleuthera Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    22,694
    Likes Received:
    11,760
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It's in an old-fashioned book, and I know you well enough to know you are NOT INTERESTED. The truth scares you.
     
    Bob0627 likes this.
  18. Eleuthera

    Eleuthera Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    22,694
    Likes Received:
    11,760
    Trophy Points:
    113
    We've been through this before Gam. You require a link for your world to exist, while I understand that knowledge can be gained and facts learned by other means.

    We know each other Gam. When you get a link that proves you wrong on any given issue, you deny the facts and the truth. After months, it becomes predictable and boring.

    In the end, it doesn't matter a bit where there were AAM at the WH that day or not. It was an inside job all the way. You embrace an impossible story, I reject it.

    17 years later you still have not realized how we were all fooled. I would be embarrassed to admit that in public.
     
  19. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Some questions for you Scott.

    I marked up the "depthcheck" image from the site linked above.

    1. Why do the author's red perspective lines all of a sudden take a dip downward at the part of the building that juts out? The yellow lines are straight lines matching the roofline up to the part the juts out. All of the other red lines are straight. If he adjusted for the distortion of the lens, why are only the two lines affected on the building?

    2. Why is the tail of the plane the author uses at such a steep angle? It matches the angle of a plane viewed directly from the side shown above it.

    3. Why does the author's plane match the length of the plane viewed directly from the side (shown above it). If it truly matched the angle of the plane's trajectory, it would be foreshortened like the image of the plane I added below the author's plane.

    depthcheck (2).jpg
     
    Last edited: Sep 14, 2018
  20. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    No, I require proof, not some lame excuse that "I can't provide any proof, you just have to believe. The real world requires proof when someone makes a claim that is in doubt. What world do you live in? You live in a world where claims can be made and you just believe them without any supporting evidence?

    That's the most idiotic thing I've ever heard.

    Go peddle your "fantasy world" views somewhere else.
     
  21. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    And evidence to support your claims scares YOU.
     
  22. Eleuthera

    Eleuthera Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    22,694
    Likes Received:
    11,760
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It was time to move on a long time ago Gam. The so-called debate ended years ago with the report from the commission set up to fail. It was an inside job all the way.

    You pretend that links prove something. Yes, of course they sometimes can, but the big picture has been clear for many years now--the official story is impossible.

    You're making a big deal about whether or not there were AAM at the White House, but the proverbial horse left the proverbial barn years ago. The official story is utterly bankrupt. The findings of the 911 Commission are as bogus as the findings of the Warren Commission.
     
  23. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Wrong.

    It's not just because it exceeded VMO.Try doing a little more research before making idiotic statements like this.
     
  24. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    ANY information. You've provided nothing but fantasy claims with no supporting evidence whatsoever. Continue to live in your fantasy world.
     
  25. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    The "picture is clear".

    :roflol:

    That's why you and your truther brethren can't come together as one and agree on exactly happened. everyone supposedly has "scientific" proof as to what they think:

    Thermite
    Explosives
    Missiles
    Holograms
    Nukes
    Energy Weapons

    Yeah, you keep living the fantasy that the picture is clear. At least I've stuck with the only explanation that makes any sense.

    No wonder you can't provide proof of your claims. It simply doesn't exist.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page