Proof positive no plane flew over the Pentagon

Discussion in '9/11' started by Patriot911, Feb 5, 2012.

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. Patriot911

    Patriot911 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    9,312
    Likes Received:
    40
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yet the diameter of a 757 fuselage is 14', perfect for making a 16' hole. The wings aren't strong enough to penetrate a reinforced wall.

    So you lie about there being no marks in order to lie about no aircraft hitting the Pentagon. :lol: How utterly retarded. Try again. I posted a very comprehensive link for you. I suggest you actually go read it.

    Only the outer wall was reinforced. The other walls were normal walls. The 757 also didn't reach the center court. Funny how someone who wants everyone to believe his lies over the evidence can't even get the simple facts right.

    Maybe when you look at the real facts you will realize just how silly and retarded your claim is. Until then I am sure you will just keep repeating the same lies.
     
  2. Jango

    Jango New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2012
    Messages:
    2,683
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    [​IMG]
    Really?
     
  3. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yes,Really.
     
  4. Jethro

    Jethro New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2012
    Messages:
    20
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Still no evidence by the dumbed down government propaganda crowd, that a 757 actually hit the Pentagon...they have no evidence, because none exists...and a lot of evidence has been presented to them that it could NOT have been a 757, as the evidence all points to a missile...they refuse to accept the fact that the government officials lied to them, and they are living a lie believing this...they should ask themselves the question "why was the authorities so anxious to seize all the videos of the event? Answer because it shows a missile hitting the building not a commercial jetliner 757...end of story...issue indictments and start arresting government officials, it's time for trial and justice for these diabolical clowns!
     
  5. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Wreckage was found in the pentagon.....DNA from the passengers was found in the pentagon,the flight data and cockpit voice recorder was found inside the pentagon,and hundreds of people SAW the plane hit the pentagon


    All HARD evidence.....

    What do YOU have?
     
  6. Jethro

    Jethro New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2012
    Messages:
    20
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Where is all the wreckage if a 757 hit the pentagon? No luggage, no seats no wings, no engines, no bodies, fuselage wreckage, no wheels, no nothing...where did all this wreckage disappear to? It magic, ..everything disappears..no evidence...yet the deniers of a government conspiracy continue to dream along in this fantasy world...where did it all go? Oh yes here';s one for you denial freaks....how does a 757 go through 12 feet of reenforced concrete? I will help you...it cannot!!!!...kind of shoots your neat little package of lies all to rat.... eh boys...lol...and the authorities would not want those dreaded videos out to the public which show the missile hitting the building would they/......you deniers should look at all the evidence, not just form an opinion and try to fit everything into it...start looking at the facts please!
     
  7. Fangbeer

    Fangbeer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2011
    Messages:
    10,639
    Likes Received:
    3,691
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's funny from a guy who claims to not know where the evidence is or was. What's the deal with all these forensic scientists that think they can examine a crime scene by simply looking at some photos taken by reporters?
     
  8. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    0
    This one thinks the walls of the pentagon are 12 feet thick,and he calls us denial freaks.

    Ahhh,irony.
     
  9. Jango

    Jango New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2012
    Messages:
    2,683
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Where is the wing?
    Where is the damage to the wall from the wing?
     
  10. Jethro

    Jethro New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2012
    Messages:
    20
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Lonesome..no wonder you are lonesome...You should know there are five rings of concrete in the pentagon totally 12 ft of reinforced concrete (2 feet each)...thats one tough 757 to penetrate all those....oh yeah it was a missile..with a buncker buster bomb that did it...oh and where were the roof mounted air defence missiles? Guess they were like NORAD, all standing down to let the attack happen...Lonesome you and patriot and the girls should take up knitting or whatever it is you old folks do, and leave the analysis of evidence to professionals like me to get at the truth...lol.....
     
  11. DDave

    DDave Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2010
    Messages:
    2,002
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Oh Good Lord, that's some funny stuff. :mrgreen:

    I hear there's an opening for an "analyst" over at Let's Roll.
     
  12. RtWngaFraud

    RtWngaFraud Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2011
    Messages:
    20,420
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Well....we know you can't fill that role, now don't we??? ROFL
     
  13. DDave

    DDave Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2010
    Messages:
    2,002
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Nope, I can't. My grip on reality is WAY to firm for me to succeed over there. :mrgreen:

    I see you're still a member in good standing though. Says a lot about you.
     
  14. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    'Fraud's been popping up in several other internet forums lately too, Phil must be paying overtime.
     
  15. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Where the picture says 'left wing impact damage'

    Duh.
     
  16. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    0
    'Professionals' like you?....oh brother....

    The walls of the pentagon are made up of layers of concrete,masonary,and limestone
     
  17. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    In addition to everything else, you seem to have trouble with basic math.
     
  18. Fangbeer

    Fangbeer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2011
    Messages:
    10,639
    Likes Received:
    3,691
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yeah, I was going to try and explain compressive strength of concrete vs tensile strength and the amount of force generated over a relatively small surface area due to the mass and speed of the aircraft, and decided that it was not worth my time.
     
  19. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    5,259
    Likes Received:
    843
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Even a layman can see that the crash site is not consistent with a 757's having crashed there. Look what the wings of a 767 did to the tower in this picture.
    http://jabbajoo.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341c0ac653ef00e5537c495d8834-pi

    The wall shows no sign of wings having hit.
    http://www.physics911.net/missingwings
    (fourth picture from top, read the article too)

    Here's what an expert says.
    http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/ArticlesMeyer3March2006.html

    There's a ton of other Pentagon-related proof.
    http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=144746


    (from post #180)
    (from post #170)
    I addressed the passenger DNA issue and you two ignored what I said. Here's the post you ignored.
    http://www.politicalforum.com/9-11/...ane-flew-over-pentagon-17.html#post1061685936

    Then you went on as if I hadn't addressed it. You'd get laughed out of the debating hall for this kind of behavior.
     
  20. Fangbeer

    Fangbeer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2011
    Messages:
    10,639
    Likes Received:
    3,691
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I always chuckle when a conspiracy propagates on things that "Even a layman can see" It's quite obvious that you rely on people that have little to no idea what they are looking at to begin with, and you try and fill them with your own explanations of what caused the things they are looking at. I can't imagine why you think it's a benefit to your argument. "Hey, look! This 4 year old can't understand the mechanics of an impact between an airliner and a building! I was able to convince them it was a missile, so it must have been a missile instead!"

    Don't you realize that we think it takes a layman to agree with you? Experts for the most part think you're wrong. On top of that, the majority of the "experts" you reference rely on assumptions made outside of their field of expertise. You have dumb architects that think they are expert structural engineers. You have moronic pilots that think they are experts in military response. You have stupid photographers that think they are experts in demolition. That's why after 11 years the 9/11 truth movement has no other recourse but to lurk in the basements of forgotten internet forums.

    You said that you addressed the "DNA issue." You did no such thing. You posted a video of a guy that asks stupid questions which conveniently provides him an opportunity to conjecture stupid answers.
     
  21. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    5,259
    Likes Received:
    843
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The above is a classic example of handwaving.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handwaving

    There's nothing there that addresses actual issues. Your rhetoric may impress a few teenagers who don't click on the links and view the info but you're not impressing any thinking people who've looked at the info.
    http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=144746
    http://www.tvnewslies.org/html/9_11_facts.html

    There are lots of professionals who don't agree with the official story.
    http://www.patriotsquestion911.com/professors.html
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZEvA8BCoBw
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YW6mJOqRDI4

    When you pro-official version people are shown to be wrong in a debate, you handwave and tap dance around until the issue blows over and gets buried and then you go on as if nothing had happened.
    http://www.opposingdigits.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1222
    (excerpt)
    ----------------------------------------------------------------
    6) An odd kind of "artificial" emotionalism and an unusually thick skin -- an ability to persevere and persist even in the face of overwhelming criticism and non-acceptance. This likely stems from intelligence community training that, no matter how condemning the evidence, deny everything, and never become emotionally involved or reactive. The net result for a disinfo artist is that emotions can seem artificial. Most people, if responding in anger, for instance, will express their animosity throughout their presentation. But disinfo types usually have trouble maintaining the "image" and are hot and cold with respect to emotions they pretend to have and the more calm or normal communications which are not emotional. It's just a job, and they often seem unable to "act their role in type" as well in a communications medium as they might be able in a real face-to-face conversation/confrontation. You might have outright rage and indignation one moment, ho-hum the next, and more anger later -- an emotional yo-yo. With respect to being thick-skinned, no amount of criticism will deter them from doing their job, and they will generally continue their old disinfo patterns without any adjustments to criticisms of how obvious it is that they play that game -- where a more rational individual who truly cares what others think might seek to improve their communications style, substance, and so forth.
    ------------------------------------------------------------


    Hey Jethro

    Thanks for joining in.
     
  22. Patriot911

    Patriot911 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    9,312
    Likes Received:
    40
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So, Scott, why is it nobody agrees with you if you have all this evidence nobody can refute? I mean, let's overlook the fact you can't produce one single shred of real evidence and focus on your claims that nobody can walk away from your bull(*)(*)(*)(*) without believing it is true. How can that be if to date nobody believes your bull(*)(*)(*)(*)? Your claims, if true and proven, should have spread like wildfire, yet you can't even get enough people to make a spark. \

    Why is that? You keep running away from responding to these clear cut and undeniable facts.
     
  23. Fangbeer

    Fangbeer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2011
    Messages:
    10,639
    Likes Received:
    3,691
    Trophy Points:
    113
    When someone attempts to argue with a fallacious unsupported argument handwaving is appropriate. I think that arguments that begin with "even a layman knows" is one such argument.

    When you raise actual issues I would be glad to address them.

    Questions are not proof. This is the heart of the fallacy your argument depends on.

    I did not tap dance around your DNA link. Your supposed proof is a guy who claims that there was opportunity to tamper with evidence. Opportunity is not proof. Questions are not proof. Possibilities are not proof. Proof would require production of not just the opportunity to commit such a crime, but it also must produce and prove a motive, and a means to commit such a crime. Proof would require the production of a suspect that collected tampered with DNA, and evidence that this collection took place in the form of physical evidence, documentary evidence, or testimonial evidence. It would require that the suspect had a motive to do such a thing with physical evidence, documentary evidence or testimonial evidence that such a motive existed. It would require that the suspect was capable of such a task with physical evidence, documentary evidence, or testimonial evidence.

    Your video doesn't even come close to this.

    A proof must take all available evidence into account. It does not simply cast aside evidence as tampered with or fabricated.
    A proof must be compelling. As Patriot points out, few people are compelled to believe your so called proof.
     
  24. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    5,259
    Likes Received:
    843
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You people seemed to be saying that the DNA's matching was proof that flight 77 had crashed into the Pentagon. I pointed out that there is a plausible scenario that would explain the DNA.
    http://www.politicalforum.com/9-11/...ane-flew-over-pentagon-17.html#post1061685936

    If there are plausible alternative scenarios to your claim, it can't be used as proof. Do you consider the DNA to be proof that flight 77 hit the Pentagon?
     
  25. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It's neither proof nor plausible,Scott/Cosmored/Fatty88
     

Share This Page