Thread: 9/11 truth

All accounts of a plane flying into the Pentagon vary. Some saw a big plane, some saw a small one, some said it was white, others that it was silver. Some said that they wre able to identify it as an American Airlines plane. One guy said it came in like a missile. The bit of fuselage on the lawn is blue, wrong colour.

How many people claim to have seen this plane?
Not many in fact, so far I've only found around a dozen people claiming to have seen a plane. Anyone know of lots, like crowda of people seeing the thing, like in New York. Couldn't dispute that.

Originally Posted by ENT

How many people claim to have seen this plane?
Not many in fact, so far I've only found around a dozen people claiming to have seen a plane. Anyone know of lots, like crowda of people seeing the thing, like in New York. Couldn't dispute that.

Since it was coming in at about 500mph all you would had to do was blink and you
would have missed it!

Originally Posted by Mr Earl

Since it was coming in at about 500mph all you would had to do was blink and you
would have missed it!

i seriously doubt that.

True. The "plane" was moving at about 350mph according to reports.

Still, no more than a dozen or so witnesses to it and suspiciously a really unreliable piece of video with the wrong date on it purporting to be a record of the event.

Just been looking at the published seismographs of the Pentagon and NY events and reading the "explanations" made by the anti-conspiracy theory lobby.

One idiot had the brainlessness to say that a really accurate explanation of the peaks recorded could not be done because the S waves were not recorded. What total rubbish! The P waves arrive first, then the S waves. the time lapse between them is measured and is indicative of the distance from the seismograph to the source of the bang or shock or earthquake.

The ONLY reason an S wave is not picked up is because it does not travel through air or liquid. Thus in the Pentagon bang, no S wave record there indicates an explosion that is not grounded, ie is above ground, not earthed, in the air. Or in a vehicle insulated from the ground. No spikes or peaks (P waves) recorded at the Pentagon and no S waves, indicate only a small disturbance at, on or in the ground, a very minor event at ground.

Conversely, in NY, large spikes and peaks equal to about 2 or so on the Richter scale shows massive eartquake shock locally, something in the magnitude of a series of bombs going off. Both P and S waves were recorded there because the whole event was grounded. These peaks occured at the onset and during the towers' collapsing, over a period of 8-10 seconds followed by smaller disturbances as the debris hit the ground.
Rubble hit the ground with more than 30 times less force than bangs indicated by the peaks.

I emphasise, there are several peaks occuring as each tower goes down.

The plane impacts show up as blips in comparison.

^ I'm open this but we need some links and verification of these different waves.

The same goes with the sighting of the planes in NYC and the Pentagon.

Read "Dynamic Earth" An introduction to physical geology by Skinner, Porter& Park, pp 252-256

Try this,

9-11 Review: ERROR: 'Seismic Spikes Preceded the Towers' Collapses'

for both sides of the debate.

^ and ^^

ENT, thank you.

Originally Posted by ChiangMai noon

Originally Posted by Mr Earl

Since it was coming in at about 500mph all you would had to do was blink and you
would have missed it!

i seriously doubt that.

500mph is about 730 feet per second. The plane is about 230 feet long.

So it took just a 1/3 of a second to go from an aluminium tube 230 feet long, to a mess of crumpled and vapourised bits.

Originally Posted by RDN

So it took just a 1/3 of a second to go from an aluminium tube 230 feet long, to a mess of crumpled and vapourised bits.

Pssst, don't tell them, we don't want this thread to stop here...

Originally Posted by stroller

Originally Posted by RDN

So it took just a 1/3 of a second to go from an aluminium tube 230 feet long, to a mess of crumpled and vapourised bits.

Pssst, don't tell them, we don't want this thread to stop here...

Yeah, CMN would never forgive me if logic stopped this thread in its tracks.

I'm sure in the end it's still all the fault of the Chumpy McHitler and his cronies in the Eeevil SUVHaliCheneyBurtonOiiiilZionistMilitaryIndustrial Complex...

RDN,

Presuming that there was a plane travelling at that speed, I agree with you that in about 1/3 secs the lot would be compressed and exploded. Hence my argument against uncompressed body parts in the wreck, as displayed in some pics and my discounting of "eye-witness" evidence of crying and shouts of (allmost) survivors.

The speed of travel of the "plane" would necessarilly be accompanied by the sound of it's approach and explosion. At around 10 am in a busy major city thousands of people on the roads approaching and in the vicinity of the Pentagon would have heard and seen the "plane's" approach.

Why so few eye-witnesses on record to this startling event? A dozen or so only, not thousands of people jamming the switchboards as in NY.

And NO S wave on a seismograph of the event with MINIMAL P wave recorded, indicating the strongest possibility of NO ground impact of anything at all resembling a large plane impacting the Pentagon.

The confetti scatter of parts in largely one direction, to the left of the site indicated by reports, shows that the explosive force generated at that time was deflected and directed to the left and focussed, or grouped, much as a shotgun pellet scatter is. No such scatter of parts has ever been recorded after an air accident or any explosion unless it was directed by a discreet confining environment such as a tunnel or an alleyway or channel.

Or the opening of a vehicle of such explosive conveyance so as to deflect/direct the blast in a SINGLE and confined direction.

The truck bomb theory fits closest to these requirements, given the initial news reporrt of the event, the underwhelming eye-witness reports of a flying object and the seisographic report of the time.

Sorry typos "report"
and "seismograph"
in last two lines of above post.

Just going through a compilation of recorded eyewitness accounts of Pentagon (9/11). Will post shortly.

So far I've read and counted 98 eye witness accounts of various types of aircraft approaching or near the Pentagon at about 10 am on 9/11/2001.
I will look for more.

Please view my estimates as such only.

In order of frequency:
These are of (a) a large jet liner
(b) a smaller passenger craft
(c) a military cargo plane
(d) a helicopter
(e) a military jet
(f) a missile like object

Of these, most accounts refer to a large plane approaching the Pentagon at very low altitude.

There are around a dozen reports of other aircraft flying in in the same direction, all violating airspace protocols of the area, ie. at 90 degrees to standard flight paths.

The reports are at great variance to each other as to estimated size and shape of the aircraft witnessed

Some accounts clearly refer to a large plane strike impacting the Pentagon, only a dozen or so.

There are many reports of explosions at the Pentagon after the aircraft were seen, several of multiple explosions, all witnessed from outside of the building,

Descriptions of impact and diintegration of the "aircraft" vary widely, some state that it totally "morphed" (my words) into the building, while others say that various parts peeled back/ were thrown back across the lawn after a consensus estimate of two explosions on or after impact.

Most eye witnesses did not see the full flight trajectory of aircraft from moment of sighting to the actual impact moment. Only about a dozen or so did.

The seismic reports of the moment do not indicate anything even remotely like a plane crash.

Dozens of reports of the explosions/fires from staff at the Pentagon.

I'll post references asap.

There is no greater obstacle to truth than belief.

Originally Posted by RDN

I guess the guy who said he saw a plane fly into the Pentagon was part of the scam, the conspiracy, eh?

Crowd dillusion. It happens all the time. And witnesses are the most unreliable evidence. People will see things that do not exist because they get confused easily. They did simple experiments like that, and the different witness accounts on the "experiment" facts were so far from reality, it just makes yourself question the ability of people to see and report back. Unreliable.

Originally Posted by Milkman

Let It Happen On Purpose.

No, more like incompetence and they didn't know what to do.

Originally Posted by RDN

500mph

Not that close to the ground, it's impossible. Get your facts straight.

Reported speed was 350 mph, accelerating before "impact".

wouldn't the black box recordings be able to prove everything and end the speculation?

Why would it? Then people would claim that the government just made up the contents of the tape! We''d have a million new web sites spring up evaluating the contents of the 'release' and how minute static hiss pops in the recording would prove that someone in the government doctored the tape!



Instead of worrying about what crashed into the Pentagon why aren't we worrying about the massive failure (or complacency) that led to this in the first place? I believe that makes better conspiracy theory fodder than arguing over something metallic that smashed into something concrete.

Butterfly,
I took part in similar experiments as you described above, both as a "guinea pig" and as a lab statistics recorder/reporter. Most of the subjects studied reported only <55-60&#37; accuracy. A few reported <75% accurate. All subjects reported that which was expected to be reported, depending upon their cultural bias. Nobody reported at 100% accuracy levels.

There are many reports of this phenomenon accessible on the net.

Then it makes the whole idea of even using black boxes or even any recording devise redundant.
Maybe this that you are reading now is an illusion/doctored version of what I'm actually posting!

Personally, I'm not worrying about what "crashed" into the Pentagon.
I'm pointing at the probability that nothing did!
There was no failure ar complacancy involved, simply collusion to create a false flag scenario.
Reason?
Have a guess and take it step at a time.