9/11CON - The Pentagon

Discussion in '9/11' started by Bob0627, Mar 19, 2022.

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.

  1. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    4,773
    Likes Received:
    744
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Explain why he would be expert in this!
    9/11 Conspiracy Theories | Debunking Pentagon Plane Crash Myths (popularmechanics.com)
    "Why wasn’t the hole as wide as a 757’s nearly 125-foot wingspan? A crashing jet doesn’t punch a cartoon-like outline of itself into a reinforced concrete building, says ASCE team member Mete Sozen, a professor of structural engineering at Purdue University."

    "In this case, one wing hit the ground; the other was sheared off by the force of the impact with the Pentagon’s load-bearing columns, explains Sozen, who specializes in the behavior of concrete buildings. What was left of the plane flowed into the structure in a state closer to a liquid than a solid mass. “If you expected the entire wing to cut into the building,” Sozen tells Popular Mechanics, “it didn’t happen.”"

    "Blast expert Allyn E. Kilsheimer was the first structural engineer to arrive at the Pentagon after the crash and helped coordinate the emergency response. “It was absolutely a plane, and I’ll tell you why,” says Kilsheimer, CEO of KCE Structural Engineers PC in Washington, D.C. “I saw the marks of the plane wing on the face of the building. I picked up parts of the plane with the airline markings on them. I held in my hand the tail section of the plane, and I found the black box.” Kilsheimer’s eyewitness account is backed up by photos of plane wreckage inside and outside the building. Kilsheimer adds: “I held parts of uniforms from crew members in my hands, including body parts. Okay?”"

    That's 2 structural engineers telling you it was a plane and I put it to you that they know more than some pilot!

    @Scott - Are you gonna answer this!?
    @Scott - Are you gonna answer this!?
    @Scott - Are you gonna answer this!?
     
    Last edited: Jul 4, 2023
  2. Eleuthera

    Eleuthera Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    22,584
    Likes Received:
    11,683
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That "big list above" is 20 years old, and proved intellectually bankrupt 18 years ago. And you still parade around with falsehoods and expect to be taken seriously.

    From the human behavior perspective, it is easier to fool a man than it is to explain to him how he has been fooled.

    Orthographic projection WAS done, correctly, but you reject it because it contradicts your worldview.
     
  3. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    4,773
    Likes Received:
    744
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Nope. That's just arm waving. If there isn't a plane ALL OF IT is relevant and needs explaining. It needs significant numbers of people to do it and that is both absurd and a really stupid and needless thing to do. I am staggered that you can claim no plane yet fail to understand why all of that is needed.

    Option 1, crash the plane.
    Option 2, the big list that every single person claiming "no plane" has run away from.

    No - incorrect. Nothing about that list is false and your opinion about what is serious means nothing to me.

    I would explain the irony here but it is not easy to do.

    I don't have a fixed worldview. Finding a video where an internet "trufer" has drawn some lines means nothing. The plane hit a reinforced concrete building. The compressing fuselage was dense enough, carried enough kinetic energy to break straight through. The wings, in this case, did not. The hole is perfectly consistent with a 757 as confirmed by all accident investigation and images.
     
    Last edited: Jul 4, 2023
  4. Shinebox

    Shinebox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    3,471
    Likes Received:
    1,501
    Trophy Points:
    113
    please post the orthographic projection … or is that another of your “sources” that you cannot conveniently find anymore?
     
  5. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    5,259
    Likes Received:
    843
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I beg to differ. The theory that a 757 didn't hit the Pentagon has essentially been proven to the satisfaction of objective thinking people. Your playing down this clear evidence doesn't make it go away. As far as I'm concerned, the case is closed.

    http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/9-11con-the-pentagon.598106/page-15#post-1074306961
    http://politicalforum.com/index.php...lane-hit-the-pentagon.547977/#post-1070028859
    http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/9-11con-the-pentagon.598106/#post-1074214188
    http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/9-11con-the-pentagon.598106/#post-1074214216
    http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/9-11con-the-pentagon.598106/page-2#post-1074215121
    http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/9-11con-the-pentagon.598106/page-3#post-1074216313
    http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/9-11con-the-pentagon.598106/page-15#post-1074303986
    http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/9-11con-the-pentagon.598106/page-15#post-1074304182
    https://odysee.com/@whitleyblaine:0/9-11-National-Security-Alert:7?src=embed&t=4299.763391
    https://www.citizeninvestigationteam.com/faq/can-north-side-plane-hit
    https://www.citizeninvestigationteam.com/videos/national-security-alert
    https://www.thepentacon.com/Topic11.htm

    Nothing in your big list makes any of this go away. The viewers can decide for themselves.
     
    Eleuthera likes this.
  6. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    4,773
    Likes Received:
    744
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Your opinion has already been expressed. Begging to differ, whilst ignoring inconvenient questions and videos is hardly impressive.

    False. Your posts do not give any impression of objectivity and what you regard as "proven" is irrelevant.

    Show the viewers, "eager to decide for themselves"(meh!) how you explain all your "evidence". Dumping a series of batshit links and previous posts already responded to is also not impressive. They've seen your ridiculous excuse for the passengers DNA but are sure to be wondering why you keep evading the following:-

    These same eager viewers are probably laughing at you calling a "911 truther" video damage control. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot! These are highly regarded within your own "truth" movement and have proven to any rational person that it was a plane.

    • Where should this "shadow" be and why!? Evaded.
    • Explain why all of a sudden the witnesses testifying to a plane don't count!? Evaded.
    • What crazy world of "rational/unbiased" do you look at the list quoted above and arm-wave it away without addressing it? Evaded.
    • Here's a new one, since you indirectly claim that all the debris is manufactured (as is the human dna!), what stops them from just using bits from the original damn plane and "corroborating" THEM against serial numbers logged on components (vital and unique to the plane)? Evaded.
    How many extra people to do the entire fake batshit as opposed to just crashing the plane!? How do you figure the "evil-gubment" perps organized all this ludicrous extra crap?
     
    Last edited: Jul 4, 2023
  7. Shinebox

    Shinebox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    3,471
    Likes Received:
    1,501
    Trophy Points:
    113
    so neither of you have watched the Coste/Chandler videos … am I right?
     
  8. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    5,259
    Likes Received:
    843
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes, I watched it and I gave a rebuttal to it in post #363.
    http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/9-11con-the-pentagon.598106/page-15#post-1074305060

    The video to which I linked shows that their theory has some holes in it.


    Here's a pilot who says that the maneuver allegedly made by a 757 was an impossibility.
    http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/9-11con-the-pentagon.598106/page-15#post-1074306961

    Do you at least think there's a possibility that he knows what he's talking about?
     
    Eleuthera likes this.
  9. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    4,773
    Likes Received:
    744
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Calling a "911-truther" video damage control is not rebuttal. That is complete evasion.

    Once again your "scientific method" is to dump a video with ZERO analysis and ZERO explanation. There are no holes in the "911 truther" video - for once!

    That is an absurd statement. Doing a 330 degree bank over that distance, though inconvenient to the passengers is EASILY within the scope of the plane!

    When was he interviewed, what was he shown!? Suppose your lying video maker showed him the wrong thing or just made up some crap!

    Children can do these simple maneuvers on flight simulators, ones that very accurately depict the scope of the plane!
     
    Last edited: Jul 6, 2023
  10. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    4,773
    Likes Received:
    744
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So to reiterate, no rebuttal on an actual "truther" video that is "damage control". Hilarious. Now the "911 truth" movement need to limit damage by showing totally obvious proof that it was a plane? That is just absurd.

    Reiterating that it is customary to analyze videos and offer useful commentary. Dumping them with neither is pathetic,

    Reiterating, AA77 performed maneuvers that were easily within the capabilities of a 757. Flying close to the ground is tricky to do. Luckily he just dived into the side of the Pentagon with only about 200 yards low down. Expert accident investigators concluded that the wing snapped back in contact with the ground.

    Reiterating, this is a "911-truther" doing the interviewing. At no point are we informed as to what information the pilot has been given. Pilots on forums dispute his claims.
     
  11. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    4,773
    Likes Received:
    744
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Anyone want to give honest answers here? The big list never gets addressed!
     
    Last edited: Jul 6, 2023
  12. Shinebox

    Shinebox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    3,471
    Likes Received:
    1,501
    Trophy Points:
    113
    you didn’t watch it Scott and you didn’t provide a rebuttal … damage control is a rebuttal?
     
  13. undertheradar

    undertheradar Newly Registered

    Joined:
    May 1, 2019
    Messages:
    346
    Likes Received:
    179
    Trophy Points:
    43
  14. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    4,773
    Likes Received:
    744
    Trophy Points:
    113
    SO WHAT! It's truly baffling that conspiracy theorists can look at government incompetence, inaccuracies and make the conclusion that there must be some "evil" reason. God knows how you think this contributes towards the stunning lack of proof that there WASN'T a plane!
     
  15. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    5,259
    Likes Received:
    843
    Trophy Points:
    113
  16. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    4,773
    Likes Received:
    744
    Trophy Points:
    113
    But YOU can ignore all the reasons that show this idiotic claim to be false.
    Show the viewers, how you explain all your "evidence". Dumping a series of batshit links and previous posts already responded to is quite pathetic. They've seen your ridiculous excuse for the passengers DNA but are sure to be wondering why you keep evading the following:-
    • Now we have to involve countless numbers of people to dispose , of the actual plane!
    • Burn it up and distribute parts all around the lawn and building!
    • HEY, why don't they just PRETEND to corroborate the serial numbers!?
    • We have to fabricate the ATC involvement.
    • We have to coerce all the eye-witnesses.
    • We have to have explosions to knock out lamp posts etc.
    • We have to fabricate the National Guard plane witness accounts.
    • We have to involve a team to blow up the building/launch the missile/other plane whichever batshit alternative is suggested!
    • Now we have to dispose / murder all the passengers, dismember some of them and scatter their DNA all over the crash site!
    • How many to get all the luggage and scatter this around the area?
    • Now we have to get actual passengers to fabricate(really!) their audio transcripts and phone calls!
    • We have to fabricate the black box data and/or coerce the analysts who view it.
    Explain why the "911-truthers" would use damage control and put out a video showing every single thing you claim is a big load of nonsense!
     
  17. Eleuthera

    Eleuthera Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    22,584
    Likes Received:
    11,683
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The case has been closed for 15 years or more. All the facts and evidence, including the laws of physics, contradict the official narrative.
     
    Scott likes this.
  18. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    4,773
    Likes Received:
    744
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No, longer. It was closed a few months after. We had some engineering assessments over the years to improve the safety of our buildings, but fundamentally the evidence was all done and dusted.

    False. The opposite is true. Please do not quote "the laws of physics". I detailed quite clearly how both twin towers collapsed and once the buildings gave way at the impact points, nothing on Earth would have stopped the devastation from such massive, suddenly-released kinetic energy.

    Coming on and making these meaningless blanket statements is not even close to debate and/or helpful.
     
  19. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    4,773
    Likes Received:
    744
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If you aren't "checkmated" kindly answer this post. Also post #381 has 4 very simple questions that you keep avoiding. I'm sure the "viewers" eager to get to the truth will be waiting for you to explain all this.
     
  20. Shinebox

    Shinebox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    3,471
    Likes Received:
    1,501
    Trophy Points:
    113
    no, I’m not in a dissonant state … I would analyze it and come to a conclusion based on the veracity of the info presented …

    why have you not watched the Coste/Chandler vids?
     
  21. undertheradar

    undertheradar Newly Registered

    Joined:
    May 1, 2019
    Messages:
    346
    Likes Received:
    179
    Trophy Points:
    43
    So explain why Cheney testified in camera.
     
    Eleuthera likes this.
  22. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    4,773
    Likes Received:
    744
    Trophy Points:
    113
    "In" camera? Explain why he shouldn't have. Explain what possible batshit reason this indicates it wasn't a 757.
     
  23. Shinebox

    Shinebox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    3,471
    Likes Received:
    1,501
    Trophy Points:
    113
    forgiving the obvious grammatical error, what did Cheney say?
     
  24. undertheradar

    undertheradar Newly Registered

    Joined:
    May 1, 2019
    Messages:
    346
    Likes Received:
    179
    Trophy Points:
    43
    No - 'in camera' means in secret, off the record, no recordings or transcript made.

    My question remains.
     
    Eleuthera likes this.
  25. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    4,773
    Likes Received:
    744
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So do mine!
    Explain why he shouldn't have. Explain what possible batshit reason this indicates it wasn't a 757. If he had a secret meeting, how do you know? And really? Someone within government had a secret meeting after a major terrorist attack? Why is that a damn surprise?
     
    Last edited: Jul 12, 2023

Share This Page