There is no way scientifically possible that a plane hit the pentagon

File: 56 KB, 600x300, Pentagon12[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Sat Apr 23 20:00:58 2011 No.2938542 [Reply] [Original]

There is no way scientifically possible that a plane hit the pentagon

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 20:04:58 2011 No.2938566 above...

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 20:06:58 2011 No.2938572 plus a master pilot cant fly the way 77 supposedy did, yet a cave dweller that had trouble with a cessenna did? WAKE UP AMERICA!!

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 20:06:58 2011 No.2938574 FBI/NSA/DHS/CIA closely monitor this kind of thing ... stfu

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 20:08:58 2011 No.2938593 if it was a conspiracy, its already enormous, meaning there'd be nothing stopping them from just killing off all the conspiracy theorists too. Conspiracy theorists are still alive, ergo, it wasn't a conspiracy.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 20:09:58 2011 No.2938603 The explosion was the result of them destroying all the records they had pertaining to 9/11

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 20:09:58 2011 No.2938610 File: 94 KB, 630x496, 911-flight77-debris.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] /thread

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 20:09:58 2011 No.2938612 >>2938593 that would just make it more of a conspiracy, so they let them live

Anonymous Sat Apr 23 20:10:58 2011 No.2938617

no, for realz time. there is a lot of fishy stuff having to do with 9/11 but i think its easier explained by the government fucking up than actual malicious intent.

"Never ascribe to evil machinations what can adequately be explained away by stupidity"

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 20:10:58 2011 No.2938618 >>2938610 wow, im convinced

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 20:11:58 2011 No.2938624 >>2938542 there is no scientifically way possible the pentagon would hit a plane

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 20:12:58 2011 No.2938627 As someone who worked in Rosslyn VA on 9\11(within view of the pentagon) take it from me. It was a plane.

Anonymous Sat Apr 23 20:14:58 2011 No.2938643

>>2938612
So they'd kill the next group of conspiracy theorists, until eventually, the only people left either accept the official story, or were bought.

Besides, if its a conspiracy, someone somewhere, with more authority than some random guy on the internet would know. Now, this means that either:

A) they would've ratted out all the conspirators like any halfway decent person would do, or:

B) They're all in on it, in which case, there's nothing we can do anyways, so who cares.

Anonymous Sat Apr 23 20:14:58 2011 No.2938645

The moonlanding didnt happen. Do you really think some guys in the 60s had the technology to go to the moon?

The pyramids were built by aliens. Do you really think some ancient egyptians could build them?

9/11 was done by the government. Do you really think some sandniggers could fly planes into government buildings?

Its all the same mental process, i cant remember the name

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 20:15:58 2011 No.2938647 >>2938645 oh I just remembered. Its called being fucking retarded

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 20:16:58 2011 No.2938655 >>2938645 retardation?

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 20:19:58 2011 No.2938669 >>2938610 but but but, but they must have PLANTED that there DUH! so you'd think it was a plane.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 20:21:58 2011 No.2938681 The wings will pretty much shear off and go to pieces. The main fuselage is what will make a hole in any solid wall after a ground collision. This what happens: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zI-FkWJaVEs&feature=related

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 20:21:58 2011 No.2938682 Plane flys. Plane flys toward pentagon Plane doesn't stop or change direction Plane hit's pentagon.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 20:23:58 2011 No.2938691 >>2938682 >Plane hit's pentagon >hit's

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 20:23:58 2011 No.2938692 yeah its so obvious you wouldnt believe the government was so careless as to not fake the attack properly

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 20:31:58 2011 No.2938733 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhLhK0HeU6Q this pretty much proves that it WASNT a plane

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 20:38:58 2011 No.2938775 >>2938733 You've got to be a full retard to fall for that video.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 20:41:58 2011 No.2938801 >>2938775 >IT QUESTION GOV-MENT, HE FULL RETARD, BAAA BAAA BAAA back in the herd, with the rest of the sheeple

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 20:41:58 2011 No.2938803 everyone knows the government did 9-11. people just want to feel like they are in control. the gov wouldnt hide so many tapes, recordings, black boxes, stories, etc. if it didnt have something to hide, its really that simple.

Anonymous Sat Apr 23 20:41:58 2011 No.2938809

They confiscated CCTV footage from outside sources after it happened. Just release some of that footage and people will shut up about it. It's the fact they're not releasing it which makes me suspicious. If they said a plane hit it, why not show the footage of the fucking plane hitting it? Rather than 3 frames of an ambiguous explosion...

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 20:43:58 2011 No.2938820 >>2938733 >>2938733 if have enough noise, expositions and angry close ups we dont need to actually look into the event

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 20:47:58 2011 No.2938845 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xU4GdHLUHwU 23 trillion dollars missing in tax payers money 9/10/01. guess where those records were kept guys

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 20:49:58 2011 No.2938857 >>2938542 Wings a really fragile, not to mention filled with jet fuel. Once a plane crashes and a fire erupts along the wings, fueled by the jet fuel, the wings essentially disintegrate.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 20:50:58 2011 No.2938864 >>2938803 The NIST did their investigation, just like independent engineering firms did their investigations. No one is hiding anything, you dope-smoking conspiracy junkie.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 20:50:58 2011 No.2938871 >>2938845 >23 trillion dollars missing in tax payers money lol

Anonymous Sat Apr 23 20:51:58 2011 No.2938873
File: 149 KB, 818x1024, copperfieldjpg-cf25d89616c026b6.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

This is David Copperfield. He's an illusionist. Quite a good one, at that. One time he made the Statue of Liberty disappear.

Like many of the top illusionists, he just happens to be Jewish.

Coincidence?

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 20:53:58 2011 No.2938894 Conspiracy theorists, please read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias This is what you're doing. All The Time

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 20:54:58 2011 No.2938904 >>2938864 >the gov confirms the gov did nothing wrong nice job idiot. there is simply no debate, the government and the media are hiding tons of video, the black boxes, and more. its that fucking simple.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 20:56:58 2011 No.2938912 >>2938904 No they are not you fucking dope-smoking moron.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 20:57:58 2011 No.2938918 >>2938912 so where are the FOUR black boxes from just the 9-11 planes and ALL the video surrounding the pentagon (the most secure building in the world)?

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 20:57:58 2011 No.2938919 File: 177 KB, 680x604, MissileAttackPath[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2938682 >plane doest change direction UHH it did a loop impossible to be done with a 767.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 20:58:58 2011 No.2938924 >>2938918 from just the twin tower planes, sorry.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 20:58:58 2011 No.2938927 >>2938904 >>2938904 Hiding a black box? are you serious those things aren't as indestructible as you would think especially in the type of crash involved.

Anonymous Sat Apr 23 20:58:58 2011 No.2938931

the CIA gave money to Pakistan to give money and training to individuals, hoping they would ultimately work as "informants" (for lack of a better word)

eventually these informants completely embrace terrorist ideals and use the money and training to blow up the WTC.
that is the real reality.

no one debates this. this is all over reuters and AP (among others).

there are mainstream books written by Ivy League professors documenting this story.

not a conspiracy and no cover up.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 20:59:58 2011 No.2938933 >>2938894 thats what the sheeple are doing also

Anonymous Sat Apr 23 20:59:58 2011 No.2938934

>>2938927
oh theyre not? then why have only about 10 in all of human history ever been lost? black boxes have been recovered from oceans, jungles, all sorts of crashes. and you expect me to believe 4 of them just disappeared from the twin tower site? LOL someone loves big daddy gov dick

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:01:58 2011 No.2938939 Why is OK to be skeptical of God or homeopathy or telepathy but not 9/11? Are skeptics inconsistent or easily fooled? Are they accepting of theories that may make them look kooky or raise government suspicion (peer pressure)? Are skeptics cowards?

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:01:58 2011 No.2938940 >>2938919 Looks like a turn and not a loop. A turn very much possible with a B767. What next? Jet fuel doesn't burn hot enough to melt steel?

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:02:58 2011 No.2938945 >>2938939 atheists arent skeptics. theyre agenda pushing liberals. they worship the government.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:02:58 2011 No.2938948 >>2938933 >Using the term "sheeple" You loose all credibility at this point.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:02:58 2011 No.2938950 >>2938927 idestructuble except on 9/11 right? god you are an IDIOT

Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:03:58 2011 No.2938954

>>2938934
You are a fucking idiot. 99% of plane crashes are crash landings, where the pilot is going as slow as physically possible trying to make a survivable crash landing. They even dump their fuel before the landing. They don't fly into buildings (or the ground) at full speed with full fuel tanks and have anything recoverable left over.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:03:58 2011 No.2938962 >>2938919 "Guys, what we're going to do is build a plane" "A plane that can't corner" "Fuck making turns, if you want to make this fucker change direction, you land it and build the runway in a different direction"

Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:04:58 2011 No.2938963
File: 627 KB, 1680x1050, 1271703700305.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

I won't say that a plane didn't hit the pentagon; I don't know.

I do want to know how Hanni Hanjur - a guy who failed pilot certification because he couldn't control a little Cessna on his own - flew a gigantic commercial plane in a complicated maneuver to hit the Pentagon.

I also want to know how NORAD, which is usually responsible for getting fighter jets to commercial planes within ~10 minutes of them veering off course and losing contact, didn't have anyone in the skies when these planes were off course for ~1 hour.

I'd also like to know how WT7 building, which was not hit and was at a greater distance than some buildings which were not damaged at all, fell at -freefall- speed. Being on /sci/, I'm sure you all understand that a building falling at freefall speed means that it is not facing any resistance from lower floors or supporting girders. I'm not saying it was purposefully blown up for any reason, I'd just like to know how it happened.

>Is he asking questions? Conspiracy theorists herpy derp.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:05:58 2011 No.2938968 >>2938940 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNMakBEECqA flight simulater and professional pilot disagrees

Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:08:58 2011 No.2938984

>>2938940
Jet fuel on its own doesn't burn hot enough, but a raging office building fire does. Even then, the steel itself does NOT need to melt. At temperature ranges of 800-1000C steel looses much of it's structural integrity.

The twin towers got hit in a "sweet spot", where building collapse is unavoidable if the fire isn't dealt with.

Now, the REAL question here is, were the hijackers who piloted the two aircraft TRAINED to hit these zones of the building? Or was it dumb luck?

Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:08:58 2011 No.2938990

Airplane debris including Flight 77's black boxes,[106] the nose cone, landing gear,[107] an airplane tire,[108] and an intact cockpit seat[109] were observed at the crash site. The remains of passengers from Flight 77 were found at the Pentagon crash site and their identities confirmed by DNA analysis.[110] Many eyewitnesses saw the plane strike the Pentagon.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_conspiracy_theories

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:10:58 2011 No.2938997 >>2938968 Give it up you fucking moron.

Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:10:58 2011 No.2938998

>>2938954
proof of your claim that 99% of plane crashes are slow, without fuel, etc? like i said theres only been about 10 or so unrecovered black boxes. i dont really believe for a second every plane crash is like what you describe and even less than not a single black box out of FOUR would survive, when hundreds have survived all sorts of conditions throughout history.

but by all means please provide your evidence, i am very much open to your theory.

Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:11:58 2011 No.2939008

>>2938963
>Implying that WT7 wasn't severely damaged from getting hit by debris from the twin towers and had a raging fire going on in it
>Implying that it wasn't showing signs of collapses long before it collapses
>Implying it was a controlled demolition even though no explosives were heard going off (protip, explosions are LOUD AS FUCK).

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:11:58 2011 No.2939009 >>2938954 lol, didnt they find the "terrorists passport" at the twin tower site? surely those paper passports are indestructible but the titanium clad black boxes no way!

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:13:58 2011 No.2939015 >>2939009 It depends how far from the buildings the refuse is ejected. The engines kept going right through, so they were preserved. Anything still in the building when it collapsed was pulverized.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:13:58 2011 No.2939020 >>2939008 um lots of people did say they heard explosions

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:13:58 2011 No.2939022 >>2938617 Wisest statement of this thread. Fuck, of the whole 9/11 discussion in the last 10 years.

Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:14:58 2011 No.2939028

>>2938998
If you had two brain cells to rub together it would be obvious to you that in most crash scenarios the pilots are trying to save the plane and the passengers. Since you can't figure this out for yourself there's nothing I can do for you but to recommend you set down the crack pipe and get some fresh air.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:15:58 2011 No.2939030 >>2938984 wait you just said "office fire alone can make a steel framed building collapse"? you are a fucking IDIOT

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:16:58 2011 No.2939039 >>2939028 oh so your statistical claim isnt a statistic at all. shouldve guessed.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:16:58 2011 No.2939042 >>2939020 loud bang could be an explosion, or something inside the building collapsing, or something big and heavy and filed with terrified passengers hitting the tower.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:17:58 2011 No.2939050 >>2939030 He said weaken.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:18:58 2011 No.2939058 >>2939039 Set it down, son.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:19:58 2011 No.2939066 >>2939030 >thinking it can't We are talking about a large number of huge offices with raging fires.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:20:58 2011 No.2939080 >>2939066 In combination with critical structural damage before the fires started.

Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:20:58 2011 No.2939084

>>2939030
Erm, no, I was stating the temperatures at which steel looses much of it's integrity, temperatures which are also found in house fires.

Besides, if a fire is left unchecked long enough, a steel-framed building can very well collapse.

WT7 is different though, because it got hit by a massive amount of debris from the twin towers collapsing.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:21:58 2011 No.2939094 So who did they get to fly the planes into the towers if it wasn't these muslims who were apparently unable to do so because it would require a huge amount of skill and training? Does the US Air Force have a suicide unit?

Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:23:58 2011 No.2939105

>>2939008
>Implying that WT7 wasn't severely damaged from getting hit by debris from the twin towers and had a raging fire going on in it
>Implying that it wasn't showing signs of collapses long before it collapses
>Implying it was a controlled demolition even though no explosives were heard going off (protip, explosions are LOUD AS FUCK).

Really?
1) I'm asking questions. You are responding to your perceived implications of the questions. Please someone answer the questions if you wanna point out what a dumbass I am.
2) There have been several raging fires over the last century in NYC skyscrapers of a similar design. Not a single one of them caused a collapse or damage to the central girders. Again, there were other buildings that were closer and encountered more debris. No major structural damage.
3) Freefall. Even if the central girders / or all the floors below the top floor were so weakened by the fire that they gave way all at once, there still wouldn't be free fall, because you'd still have some resistance on the way down. Demolition experts design complicated explosive techniques to get a building to fall straight down at freefall, so it doesn't damage surrounding buildings. Perhaps the chaotic nature of a raging fire could create this same effect somehow? I guess you know.
4) Whereas there is baseless argument about whether there were explosions in WT1 and WT2, there is plenty of witness testimony from people who were in and around WT7 that there were multiple explosions before the building fell. Please do your research before you condescend to me.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:24:58 2011 No.2939117 >>2939094 > remote ? I suggest it but I dont support it?

Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:24:58 2011 No.2939119

>>2938950
>>2938950
In a crash that can destroy a building of that size and leave it a a pile of rubble i believe a black box would have little to no chance of surviving. Very few planes crash head on to buildings at max speed therefore they don't design black boxes to survive such conditions.

pascal !n5Z3VuZapw Sat Apr 23 21:24:58 2011 No.2939120

>>2938963
>I do want to know how Hanni Hanjur - a guy who failed pilot certification because he couldn't control a little Cessna on his own - flew a gigantic commercial plane in a complicated maneuver to hit the Pentagon.

Big planes are easy to control. flying into buildings is not complicated.

>I also want to know how NORAD, which is usually responsible for getting fighter jets to commercial planes within ~10 minutes of them veering off course and losing contact, didn't have anyone in the skies when these planes were off course for ~1 hour.

Because they aren't. Average response time before 9/11 was 2 hours.

Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:26:58 2011 No.2939126

>>2939094
Maybe the hijackers were misidentified by US authorities. Or deliberately misidentified.
Maybe they were working for the Libyan government?
Gaddy has used terrorist attacks before (Lockerbie bombing)
Iraniens?

This still wouldn't explain why Al-Qaeda took responsibility for the attacks.

>>	pascal !n5Z3VuZapw Sat Apr 23 21:26:58 2011 No.2939132 >>2939126 7 groups claimed responsibility.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:26:58 2011 No.2939134 >>2939105 http://www.debunking911.com/ Enjoy!

Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:27:58 2011 No.2939136

>>2939117
Remote is not possible. Even with UAVs or autopilot you need to set up a huge amount of equipment such as ILS to land them without a human pilot. To get them hit a building would require the same equipment, on a large pylon directly next to the tower at the same height.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:28:58 2011 No.2939144 oh look school must be out today...

Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:29:58 2011 No.2939156

>>2939105
2) There's never been a comparable fire combined with impact-severed structural beams in a steel sky-scraper lacking a concrete core anywhere in the world, much less in NYC.
3) The rate of fall of the buildings was exactly what physics predicts once the most damaged floor collapsed. Stop watching that loose change crap and believing it uncritically.
4) There is no reason there shouldn't be explosions in a building with generators and gas tanks and shit. There were certainly no demolition explosions, which would be quite different.

People call you a dumbass because you are uncritical in your thinking.

Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:30:58 2011 No.2939159

>>2939120
>Big planes are easy to control. flying into buildings is not complicated.
No, but flight sim programmes are easily available and a lot of practice would help a lot.

>Because they aren't. Average response time before 9/11 was 2 hours.
It's still pretty high. 10 minutes is utter bullshit. Bang on the money with this one friend.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:31:58 2011 No.2939171 >>2939120 Also, norad is set up for intercepting planes without clearance to enter US airspace. It's not set up for identifying airliners that have been hijacked already within the US, and shooting them down.

>>	pascal !n5Z3VuZapw Sat Apr 23 21:33:58 2011 No.2939184 >>2939159 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWjDpwxX0n4 people without any training flying planes. very poorly, but...

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:33:58 2011 No.2939186 >>2938939 Many of them are, yes. In the exact same proportion than in other groups.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:35:58 2011 No.2939193 File: 83 KB, 531x713, 188a6302_2722_f593.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] I'll just leave this here.

Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:35:58 2011 No.2939195

>>2939134
Interesting site, and I'll have to take a better look at it. However, from looking it over, I can't find anywhere where it discusses NORAD's lapse, or how Hanni Hanjur went from shit pilot to The Shit after his pilot training was over. The closest it touches to any of my questions has to do with WT7. It makes a good point, about how it could have fallen over from debris damage, not just fire. It does not, however, address how getting hit on the side and have a couple floors on fire results in freefall implosion. It also does not touch on the fact that several recorded interviews with people directly after claim that there were explosions in WT7 well before the supposed damage that knocked it over (not that it was actually knocked over, as you'd expect from one-sided damage from debris).

Did you see any articles on this that you can point out to me? Otherwise, I will spend some more time on the site looking for them.

Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:35:58 2011 No.2939197

>>2939171
http://blogs.citypages.com/blotter/2009/10/did_nwa_pilots.php

>The Airbus A320 apparently overshot the airport by more than 100 miles and had to circle back to land after temporarily losing radio contact with air-traffic controllers.

No radio contact for a hundred miles and still no fighters on the aircraft. NORAD is indeed going to be able to track down every noncommunative aircraft and have a fighter at the scene in ten minutes

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:38:58 2011 No.2939214 >>2939184 >guy with no experience or even looking through any books >the guys who took over would never think of getting every book they could and practise over and over. >mythbusters

Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:39:58 2011 No.2939222

>>2939156
Interesting. Can you quote me any resource that purports to show how a building, hit on one side and with fire that's only hot enough to break structural integrity (but not to melt), is predicted to fall straight down at freefall speed? I'd be interested in learning about that, because everything I know about physics suggests otherwise.

Also, I enjoy the structure of this argument:
>Believer: But there weren't any explosions at WT7!
>Me: Um, yes there were.
>Believer: But the explosions make perfect sense, you nutty conspiracy theorist!

;) Got a kick out of that one.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:41:58 2011 No.2939236 Goddamnit, conspiracy theorists are morons. Please die, OP.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:43:58 2011 No.2939247 >>2939222 >only hot enough to break structural integrity (but not to melt) What? I don't think you understand physics.

>>	pascal !n5Z3VuZapw Sat Apr 23 21:43:58 2011 No.2939250 >>2939197 YOu can't launch planes cold. At the time they only kept 10 hot planes across the country. average Intercept time 2 hours. As for non communicative. Norad does not speak with commercial planes. that is a different agency.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:44:58 2011 No.2939253 >>2939222 Yes. If you're talking about building 7, just look at the WTC-7 wiki page. It has links to the detailed engineering analysis of exactly what happened.

Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:45:58 2011 No.2939260
File: 92 KB, 600x674, 1303311685001.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

You guys should go to /new/ if you want to understand this stuff. Though, I can't believe people on /sci/ don't realize this was a conspiracy. I guess it really doesn't matter if you're good with science and mathematics. In the end your closed mind will always leave you stuck in a dark corner.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:46:58 2011 No.2939266 >>2939250 >Norad does not speak with commercial planes yet claim that they are there to intercept commercial aircraft such as in 9/11

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:50:58 2011 No.2939299 reported sage thread, stay on topic please

>>	pascal !n5Z3VuZapw Sat Apr 23 21:52:58 2011 No.2939307 >>2939266 they can track the planes on radar. But since norad doesn't get flight plans either, they can't tell who is where they are supposed to be. Now if a plan flies over a no fly zone, they certainly would respond.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:52:58 2011 No.2939313 >>2939247 Engineer here. Sounds like you're the one who doesn't understand physics.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:52:58 2011 No.2939314 >>2939266 >yet claim that they are there to intercept commercial aircraft such as in 9/11 They announced this AFTER 9/11.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 21:54:58 2011 No.2939331 >>2939313 bull shit Engineer here. You can notice, that when a metal is heated, but not to melting point, it becomes malleable and susceptible to breaking under strain.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 22:01:58 2011 No.2939388 All theories pointing out it was a government conspiracy have been debunked already by scientists and engineers. It was ok to wonder if it was a conspiracy when we lacked data 10 years ago. It is not ok now.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 22:03:58 2011 No.2939401 >>2939222 Those buildings didn't fall at freefall speed. Stop using the same tired arguments that have been disproven years ago. In fact admit already that you're wrong and move on. Is that so hard?

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 22:07:58 2011 No.2939441 SHEARING FORCE DOESN'T EXIST. WAKE UP SHEEPLE!

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 22:09:58 2011 No.2939452 Conspiracies are fundamentally flawed for this reason: the more you deny them, the more it becomes true in the mind of a conspirator. Also, what if the plane came in at a different angle? That is, wings pointed up? Check. Mate.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 22:10:58 2011 No.2939457 I don't believe the twin towers got hit at all I know they are still there In NY and America just made it up for us to feel sorry for them, you did a good job on editing them out of modern movies though. 0/10 America

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 22:12:58 2011 No.2939468 >>2939457 I've been to NYC. The towers at first do appear to be gone. But on closer inspection, a huge array of mirrors were positioned in just the right place to hide them.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 22:14:58 2011 No.2939486 >>2939468 I fucking knew it

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 22:17:58 2011 No.2939502 ITT: schizophrenics with a lot of time on their hands

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 22:24:58 2011 No.2939539 >>2939401 Interesting, since the official report is that WT7 fell at freefall speed. Since you are denying the official report, does that make you a conspiracy theorist?

Anonymous Sat Apr 23 22:32:58 2011 No.2939591

>>2939539
"freefall speed" is only a term used by nutjobs. It's a good way to identify them.

BTW, whose report are you calling the "official report"?

"Official report" is another of those terms. It's designed to hide the fact that these things have been investigated independently by a number of organizations.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 23 22:34:58 2011 No.2939599 >>2939591 I honestly think you mean to say mis-investigated.

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/sci/ - Science & Math